MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 15269: Effect of a Systemic Right Ventricle With A Biventricular Circulation on Cardiorespiratory Fitness

2023· article· en· W4389957983 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Desrosiers-Gagnon, N. Mahdi, Michel White, Paul Khairy, François Pierre Mongeon, Blandine Mondésert, Annie Dore, Daniel Gagnon, Marie-Alexandre CHAIX

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVentricleInternal medicineCardiorespiratory fitnessEjection fractionCardiologyHeart failureSystemic circulationHyperdynamic circulationCardiac function curveHemodynamicsVascular resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The clinical care of adults with a systemic right ventricle with biventricular circulation (sRV-biV) is influenced by cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) evaluation. However, prognostic markers for CRF are derived from analyses of adults with a systemic left ventricle (sLV). While some studies suggest that CRF is lower in adults with sRV-biV compared to those with a sLV, they have not controlled for key clinical characteristics and ventricular function of the systemic ventricle. Research Question: Is CRF lower in adults with a sRV-biV compared to adults with sLV matched for clinical characteristics and systemic ventricular function? Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional comparison of exercise stress test results was performed comparing 24 adults with sRV-biV to 24 adults with a sLV matched for sex (4 females), age (sRV-biV: 46 ± 9 years, sLV: 46 ± 11 years), body mass index (sRV-biV: 28 ± 4 kg/m 2 , sLV: 27 ± 4 kg/m 2 ), ejection fraction of the systemic ventricle (normal: 2, mild: 4, moderate: 11, severe: 7), NYHA class (I: 6, II: 17, III: 1), and doses of diuretics (spironolactone ≤ 25 mg: 24, furosemide ≤ 80 mg: 24 ). Peak VO 2 was compared between groups with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Effect sizes are reported as Cohen’s d . Results: Peak VO 2 did not differ significantly between groups (sRV-biV: 20.3 ± 4.2 vs. sLV: 20.9 ± 6.0 mL/kg/min, p=0.43, d =0.18). When patients were dichotomized according to the Weber criterion for optimal versus suboptimal CRF (sLV peak VO 2 > or ≤ 20 mL/kg/min), peak VO 2 was lower in sRV-biV in those with optimal CRF (sRV-biV: 21.0 ± 4.8 vs sLV: 26.6 ± 5.1 mL/kg/min, p=0.006, d =0.72). In contrast, peak VO 2 was greater in sRV-biV in those with suboptimal CRF (sRV-biV: 19.3 ± 3.5 vs. sLV: 16.9 ± 2.0 mL/kg/min, p=0.12, d =NA). Conclusion: Although peak VO 2 values are similar among patients with a sRV-biV and matched controls with a sLV, differences are observed when stratified according to the Weber criteria for optimal CRF. These results may reflect different pathophysiological adaptive mechanisms of a sRV vs sLV. Further studies are required to establish specific prognostic thresholds for patients with sRV-biV.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.749

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 venueCirculationSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207