MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380291718 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2023.1059735

Comparison of short and long forms of the Flinders program of chronic disease SELF-management for participants starting SGLT-2 inhibitors for congestive heart failure (SELFMAN-HF): protocol for a prospective, observational study

2023· article· en· W4380291718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pupalan Iyngkaran, Fahad Hanna, Sharon Andrew, John D. Horowitz, Malcolm Battersby, Maximilian de Courten

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart failureMedicineObservational studyEjection fractionCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyDecompensationDisease managementConcordanceIntensive care medicineClinical endpointDiseaseInternal medicineClinical trialAnginaMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Congestive heart failure (CHF) causes significant morbidity and mortality. It is an epidemic, and costs are escalating. CHF is a chronic disease whose trajectory includes stable phases, periods of decompensation, and finally palliation. Health services and medical therapies must match the various patient needs. Chronic disease self-management (CDSM) programmes that are patient-focused, identify problems and set actionable goals that appear as a logical, cost-friendly method to navigate patient journeys. There have been challenges in standardising and implementing CHF programmes. Methods and analysis SELFMAN-HF is a prospective, observational study to evaluate the feasibility and validity of the SCRinHF tool, a one-page self-management and readmission risk prediction tool for CHF, with an established, comprehensive CDSM tool. Eligible patients will have CHF with left ventricular ejection fraction <40% and commenced sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-i) within 6 months of recruitment. The primary endpoint is the 80% concordance in readmission risk predicted by the SCRinHF tool. The study will recruit >40 patients and is expected to last 18 months. Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by the St Vincent’s ethics committee (approval no. LRR 177/21). All participants will complete a written informed consent prior to enrolment in the study. The study results will be disseminated widely via local and international health conferences and peer-reviewed publications.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.007

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207