Registry of Aortic Diseases to Model Adverse Events and Progression (ROADMAP) in Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Study Design and Rationale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To describe the design and methodological approach of a multicenter, retrospective study to externally validate a clinical and imaging-based model for predicting the risk of late adverse events in patients with initially uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD). Materials and Methods: The Registry of Aortic Diseases to Model Adverse Events and Progression (ROADMAP) is a collaboration between 10 academic aortic centers in North America and Europe. Two centers have previously developed and internally validated a recently developed risk prediction model. Clinical and imaging data from eight ROADMAP centers will be used for external validation. Patients with uTBAD who survived the initial hospitalization between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2013, with follow-up until 2020, will be retrospectively identified. Clinical and imaging data from the index hospitalization and all follow-up encounters will be collected at each center and transferred to the coordinating center for analysis. Baseline and follow-up CT scans will be evaluated by cardiovascular imaging experts using a standardized technique. Results: The primary end point is the occurrence of late adverse events, defined as aneurysm formation (≥6 cm), rapid expansion of the aorta (≥1 cm/y), fatal or nonfatal aortic rupture, new refractory pain, uncontrollable hypertension, and organ or limb malperfusion. The previously derived multivariable model will be externally validated by using Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. Conclusion: CT Angiography, Vascular, Aorta, Dissection, Outcomes Analysis, Aortic Dissection, MRI, TEVAR© RSNA, 2022See also the commentary by Rajiah in this issue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.069 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".