MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Algorithms and clinical decision-making tools for ruling out acute aortic syndrome in the emergency department: a narrative review

2024· review· en· W4396738884 on OpenAlexaff
Robert C.F. Pena, Marion A. Hofmann Bowman, Robert Ohle, Sherene Shalhub, Kim A. Eagle

Bibliographic record

VenueItalian Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical diagnosisEmergency departmentAcute aortic syndromeIntensive care medicineModalitiesIntervention (counseling)Pediatric emergency medicineDiseaseMedical emergencyEmergency medicineEmergency physicianRadiologySurgeryInternal medicineAortic dissectionAorta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) remains one of the most challenging diagnoses for Emergency Physicians. Given the time-sensitive nature of this highly fatal disease state, rapid and accurate testing modalities and diagnostic algorithms are sorely needed to reduce the high rates of missed diagnoses in the emergency department (ED). Several clinical tools and scoring systems have been proposed over the past decade in an effort to assist physicians in achieving this end and thus improve overall patient morbidity and mortality with more prompt identification and subsequent intervention. These are often based on prior expert guidelines, high-risk clinical features well-established in AAS, biomarkers, imaging studies, and other metrics regularly obtained in the ED. Unfortunately, all algorithms and clinical decision-making tools currently available have yet to be externally, prospectively validated to provide a reliable, definitive means of either diagnosing or ruling-out AAS in the ED. However, research is ongoing, the literature remains rather robust, and continued efforts are underway to develop and validate an optimal tool for widespread, standardized use for this “never-miss” diagnosis in emergency medicine.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueItalian Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery→Same topicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches→French-language works237,207→