MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391485698 · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2024.1344014

Application of a modified clinical classification for pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with congenital heart disease in children: emphasis on atrial septal defects and transposition of the great arteries. An analysis from the TOPP registry

2024· article· en· W4391485698 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Wacker, Tilman Humpl, Rolf M.F. Berger, D. Dunbar Ivy, David Bowers, Damien Bonnet, Maurice Beghetti

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersJanssen PharmaceuticalsUniversité de Genève
KeywordsMedicineGreat arteriesEisenmenger syndromeInternal medicineCohortHeart diseasePulmonary hypertensionCardiologyShunt (medical)HemodynamicsPulmonary artery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: A proportion of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with congenital heart disease (PAH-CHD) do not fit in the current classification. We aimed to analyse the applicability of an adapted clinical classification of PAH-CHD to pediatric patients using the TOPP-1 registry (Tracking Outcomes and Practice in Pediatric Pulmonary Hypertension) and focus on atrial septal defects (ASD) and transposition of the great arteries (TGA). Methods and results: Hemodynamic and clinical data of all patients with PAH-CHD in the TOPP cohort were reviewed. Patients were classified according to predefined ABCDE categories (A: Eisenmenger syndrome, B: left-to-right shunt, C: coincidental defects, including all ASDs, D: corrected CHD, E: TGA), or as complex CHD (group 5), by 2 independent investigators. In case of disagreement, a third reviewer could either settle a final decision, or the patient was deemed not classifiable. Survival curves were calculated for each group and compared to idiopathic PAH patients of the registry. A total of 223 out of 531 patients in the registry had PAH-CHD, and 193 were categorized to the following groups: A 39(20%), B 27(14%), C 62(32%) including 43 ASDs, D 58(30%), E 7(4%), whereas 6 patients were categorized as group 5, and 10 patients were unable to be classified. No survival difference could be demonstrated between the groups. Conclusions: This modified classification seems to be more applicable to pediatric PAH-CHD patients than the previous classification, but some patients with PAH-CHD who never had a shunt remain unclassifiable. The role of ASD in pediatric PH should be reconsidered.

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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207