MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312746352 · doi:10.5114/aic.2022.120373

Perfect optimization during coronary stent implantation – is it always beneficial? Staged primary percutaneous coronary angioplasty in a young patient with acute myocardial infarction

2022· article· en· W4312746352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michał Chyrchel, Natalia Maruszak, Weronika Pilch, Artur Pawlik, Stanisław Bartuś

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Interventional Cardiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterventional cardiologyAngioplastyMyocardial infarctionCardiologyInternal medicineStentPercutaneousPercutaneous coronary interventionPrimary angioplastyCoronary stentRestenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ENWEndNote BIBJabRef, Mendeley RISPapers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero AMA Chyrchel M, Maruszak N, Pilch W, Pawlik A, Bartuś S. Perfect optimization during coronary stent implantation – is it always beneficial? Staged primary percutaneous coronary angioplasty in a young patient with acute myocardial infarction. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej. 2022. doi:10.5114/aic.2022.120373. APA Chyrchel, M., Maruszak, N., Pilch, W., Pawlik, A., & Bartuś, S. (2022). Perfect optimization during coronary stent implantation – is it always beneficial? Staged primary percutaneous coronary angioplasty in a young patient with acute myocardial infarction. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej. https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2022.120373 Chicago Chyrchel, Michał, Natalia Maruszak, Weronika Pilch, Artur Pawlik, and Stanisław Bartuś. 2022. "Perfect optimization during coronary stent implantation – is it always beneficial? Staged primary percutaneous coronary angioplasty in a young patient with acute myocardial infarction". Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej. doi:10.5114/aic.2022.120373. Harvard Chyrchel, M., Maruszak, N., Pilch, W., Pawlik, A., and Bartuś, S. (2022). Perfect optimization during coronary stent implantation – is it always beneficial? Staged primary percutaneous coronary angioplasty in a young patient with acute myocardial infarction. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej. https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2022.120373 MLA Chyrchel, Michał et al. "Perfect optimization during coronary stent implantation – is it always beneficial? Staged primary percutaneous coronary angioplasty in a young patient with acute myocardial infarction." Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej, 2022. doi:10.5114/aic.2022.120373. Vancouver Chyrchel M, Maruszak N, Pilch W, Pawlik A, Bartuś S. Perfect optimization during coronary stent implantation – is it always beneficial? Staged primary percutaneous coronary angioplasty in a young patient with acute myocardial infarction. Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej. 2022. doi:10.5114/aic.2022.120373.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Interventional CardiologySame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207