MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407661521 · doi:10.1016/j.atssr.2024.05.005

The First International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) Standard Dataset for Reporting Outcomes in Heart Valve Disease: Moving From Device- to Patient-Centered Outcomes

2025· article· en· W4407661521 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuel Lansac, Kevin M. Veen, Andria Joseph, Paula Blancarte Jaber, Frieda Sossi, Zofia Das‐Gupta, Suleman Aktaa, Rafael Sádaba, Vinod H. Thourani, Gry Dahle, Wilson Y. Szeto, Faisal G. Bakaeen, Elena Aïkawa, Frederick J. Schoen, Evaldas Girdauskas, Aubrey Almeida, Andreas Zuckermann, Bart Meuris, John Stott, Jolanda Kluin, Ruchika Meel, Wil Woan, Daniel Colgan, Hani Jneid, Husam H. Balkhy, Molly Szerlip, Ourania Preventza, Pinak Shah, Vera H. Rigolin, Silvana Medica, Philip V. Holmes, Marta Sitges, Philippe Pîbarot, Erwan Donal, Rebecca T. Hahn, Johanna J.M. Takkenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Thoracic Surgery Short Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsVale (Canada)
FundersNational Institutes of HealthEuropean Association for Cardio-Thoracic SurgerySociety of Thoracic SurgeonsAmerican Heart AssociationEuropean Society of CardiologyEdwards Lifesciences
KeywordsMedicineDiseaseIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Globally significant variation in treatment and course of heart valve disease (HVD) exists, and outcome measurement is procedure focused instead of patient focused. This article describes the development of a patient-related (International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement) standard set of outcomes and case mix to be measured in patients with HVD. Methods: A multisociety working group was formed that included patient representatives and representatives from scientific cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery societies that publish current guidelines for HVD. The standard set was developed to monitor the patient's journey from diagnosis to treatment with either a surgical or transcatheter procedure. Candidate clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and case mix were identified through benchmark analyses and systematic reviews. Using an online modified Delphi process, the working group voted on final outcomes/case mix and corresponding definition. Results: Patients with aortic/mitral/tricuspid valve disease or root/ascending aorta >40 mm were included in the standard set. Patients entered the dataset when the diagnosis of HVD was established, allowing outcome measurement in the preprocedural, periprocedural, and postprocedural phases of patients' lives. The working group defined 5 outcome domains: vital status, patient-reported outcomes, progression of disease, cardiac function and durability, and complications of treatment. Subsequently, 16 outcome measures, including 2 patient-reported outcomes, were selected to be tracked in patients with HVD. Case-mix variables included demographic factors, demographic variables, echocardiographic variables, heart catheterization variables, and specific details on aortic/mitral/tricuspid valves and their specific interventions. Conclusions: Through a unique collaborative effort between patients and cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery societies, a standard set of measures for HVD was developed. This dataset focuses on outcome measurement regardless of treatment, moving from procedure- to patient-centered outcomes. Implementation of this dataset will facilitate global standardization of outcome measurement, allow meaningful comparison between health care systems and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines, and eventually improve patient care for those experiencing HVD worldwide.

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)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.178
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.178
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0080.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.336 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Thoracic Surgery Short ReportsSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207