MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407397505 · doi:10.1053/j.pcsu.2025.02.003

Borderline Left Ventricle: Criteria for Surgical Decision Making With an Emphasis on Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging

2025· review· en· W4407397505 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Z. Lam, Shi-Joon Yoo, Osami Honjo, David J. Barron

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Pediatric Cardiac Surgery Annual · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Structural Anomalies and Repair
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVentricleMagnetic resonance imagingCardiac magnetic resonanceRadiologyCardiologyCardiac magnetic resonance imagingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The borderline left ventricle (LV) encompasses a heterogenous group of cardiac defects that result in underdevelopment of the left heart. Data supporting decision making is difficult to interpret because borderline LV hypoplasia is a relatively rare disease comprising of a heterogenous morphologic spectrum with data originating from single-institution retrospective studies that have all used varying inclusion criteria and imaging modalities/analysis methods, whilst further confounded by heterogenous institutional practice patterns and era effects. Long-term data is lacking. This invited expert review offers a perspective on how to interpret and use some of the preoperative imaging parameters commonly proposed to decide between primary biventricular repair (BVR) versus LV recruitment. The need to integrate functional cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) parameters is emphasized. Current approaches and a broad framework with imaging criteria are presented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Pediatric Cardiac Surgery AnnualSame topicCardiac Structural Anomalies and RepairFrench-language works237,207