MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406155208 · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2024.10.103

Myocardial Fibroblast Activation After Acute Myocardial Infarction

2025· article· en· W4406155208 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Barton, Neil Craig, Krithika Loganath, Shruti Joshi, Vasiliki Tsampasian, Menaka Mahendran, Joel Lenell, Evangelos Tzolos, Trisha Singh, Beth Whittington, Jennifer Nash, Michelle C. Williams, Edwin J.R. van Beek, Mark G. MacAskill, Bronwyn Berkeley, Stefan Vezaides, Mairi Brittan, Andrew H. Baker, Stephanie Sellers, Alison Fletcher, Tim Clark, Clint Waight, Riemer H. J. A. Slart, Daniel S. Berman, Damini Dey, Piotr J. Slomka, David E. Newby, Marc R. Dweck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Fibrosis and Remodeling
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersBritish Heart FoundationNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionCardiologyInternal medicineFibroblastFibroblast activation protein, alphaCell culture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ga]-FAPI) is a novel positron-emitting radiotracer that binds activated fibroblasts. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the intensity, distribution, and time-course of fibroblast activation after acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: Ga]FAPI-46 uptake and late gadolinium enhancement, respectively. RESULTS: Ga]FAPI-46 uptake was associated with left ventricular dilatation and systolic dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial fibroblast activation peaks within a week of acute myocardial infarction and extends beyond the infarct region. It declines slowly with time, persists for years, and is associated with subsequent left ventricular remodeling. (PROFILE-MI-The FAPI Fibrosis Study; NCT05356923).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations41
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of CardiologySame topicCardiac Fibrosis and RemodelingFrench-language works237,207