MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387455930 · doi:10.46613/congastro2023-189

#189 – EVALUACIÓN DE CRITERIOS PARA MIOCARDIOPATÍA CIRRÓTICA DE PACIENTES ADULTOS EN LISTA DE ESPERA PARA TRASPLANTE HEPÁTICO DE UN HOSPITAL PÚBLICO DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE

2023· article· es· W4387455930 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicIntestinal Malrotation and Obstruction Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduccin: La miocardiopata cirrtica (MCC) est definida como una disfuncin miocrdica crnica en pacientes con cirrosis y ausencia de otra enfermedad cardiaca, es una entidad subclnica y un importante factor pronostico posterior al trasplante heptico. Los criterios diagnsticos para MCC se propusieron en el Congreso de Gastroenterologa de Montreal 2005, los cuales han sido actualizados el 2019 por el Consorcio de Miocardiopata Cirrtica. En Chile, no existen a la fecha cohortes publicadas con los nuevos criterios. Objetivos: Caracterizar y evaluar la presencia de Miocardiopata Cirrtica en pacientes en lista de espera para trasplante heptico del Hospital del Salvador (HDS) de Santiago de Chile, con los distintos criterios diagnsticos y como cambia su prevalencia. Metodologa: Cohorte histrica de pacientes adultos cirrticos en estudio previo a trasplante heptico del HDS. Se incluyeron pacientes con estudio ecocardiogrfico y sin enfermedad cardiaca intrnseca. Se realiz anlisis descriptivos de variables demogrficas y clnicas, MELD-Na, Child Pugh Score (CPS), entre otros. Las variables ecocardiogrficas, evaluadas segn criterios del 2005 y actuales. El anlisis estadstico de datos realizado mediante software (Stata15 y test de McNemar). Resultados: 102 pacientes cumplieron con criterios de elegibilidad. 52% son hombres y promedian 59 aos. El 34% CPS grado C. Un MELD-Na promedio de 18 puntos. Bajo criterios diagnsticos del 2005 se presenta mayor prevalencia general de MCC versus criterios 2019; (73,27% vs 10,89%). Mayor disfuncin diastlica en comparacin al 2019; 78,43% y 10,78% respectivamente. Asimismo, mayor disfuncin sistlica con criterios 2005 en comparacin con 2019 (8,82% vs 6,86%). Conclusiones: La implementacin de los actuales criterios representa un cambio estadsticamente significativo en el nmero de pacientes diagnosticados con MCC. As mismo, en el nmero de pacientes diagnosticados con disfuncin diastlica. Esta significancia estadstica no se representa en diagnstico de disfuncin sistlica. Los resultados expuestos son compatibles a los informados por estudios internacionales.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntestinal Malrotation and Obstruction DisordersFrench-language works237,207