MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393022248 · doi:10.14503/thij-23-8371

Distal Extent of Resection in Type A Dissection: Keeping It Simple

2024· article· en· W4393022248 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marc R. Moon, Puja Kachroo

Bibliographic record

VenueTexas Heart Institute Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAortic dissectionCardiac tamponadeSurgeryAortaAneurysmDissection (medical)Aortic aneurysmTamponade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

thought processes regarding the "best" surgical treatment of acute type A aortic dissection. Key ConsiderationsDuring acute repair of type A aortic dissection, the extent of distal reconstruction must be carefully considered.The general cardiac surgeon should perform the procedure with which they are most comfortable because early and late results are not dramatically different among various approaches.The immediate goal should be to fix the acute abnormalities that could lead to early death.Extension to the arch and beyond should be reserved for aortic centers with extensive experience in distal arch surgery.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTexas Heart Institute Journal→Same topicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches→French-language works237,207→