Excessive Trabeculation of the Left Ventricle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Excessive trabeculation, often referred to as "noncompacted" myocardium, has been described at all ages, from the fetus to the adult. Current evidence for myocardial development, however, does not support the formation of compact myocardium from noncompacted myocardium, nor the arrest of this process to result in so-called noncompaction. Excessive trabeculation is frequently observed by imaging studies in healthy individuals, as well as in association with pregnancy, athletic activity, and with cardiac diseases of inherited, acquired, developmental, or congenital origins. Adults with incidentally noted excessive trabeculation frequently require no further follow-up based on trabecular pattern alone. Patients with cardiomyopathy and excessive trabeculation are managed by cardiovascular symptoms rather than the trabecular pattern. To date, the prognostic role of excessive trabeculation in adults has not been shown to be independent of other myocardial disease. In neonates and children with excessive trabeculation and normal or abnormal function, clinical caution seems warranted because of the reported association with genetic and neuromuscular disorders. This report summarizes the evidence concerning the etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical relevance of excessive trabeculation. Gaps in current knowledge of the clinical relevance of excessive trabeculation are indicated, with priorities suggested for future research and improved diagnosis in adults and children.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".