MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412521580 · doi:10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102001

Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of Thoracic Aortic Disease

2025· review· en· W4412521580 on OpenAlexaff
Andreina Carbone, Mary J. Roman, Melissa L. Russo, Kathryn W. Holmes, Maya Brown-Zimmerman, John A. Elefteriades, Catherine M Otto, Nicholas S. Burris, Carlos Alberto Campello Jorge, Scott DeRoo, Maral Ouzounian, Matthew D. Solomon, Jay D. Humphrey, Bart Loeys, Shaine A. Morris, Guillaume Jondeau, Scott A. LeMaire, Sherene Shalhub, Siddharth K. Prakash

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Advances · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMarfan Foundation
KeywordsStandardizationThoracic aortic aneurysmGenetic dataComputer scienceClinical trialData setNatural historyVerifiable secret sharingMedicineDiseaseData scienceSet (abstract data type)Data miningAortic aneurysmMedical physicsRadiologyPathologyInternal medicineArtificial intelligenceAneurysmPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thoracic aortic aneurysms predisposing to aortic dissections are rare but potentially deadly conditions that can be inherited in families. Understanding the natural history and genetic causes of thoracic aortic disease (TAD) requires international collaboration. The aim of this project is to provide core data elements that can be assessed directly and summarized efficiently in research records while developing standards to harmonize data across registries and clinical trials. Ten contemporary TAD registries were analyzed to identify significant gaps in the amount and types of data that are needed for accurate, verifiable, and reproducible studies. The set of data elements recommended by this expert panel is intended to serve as a roadmap for future research combining precision clinical data with genetic and/or computational data to uncover new TAD phenotypes and risk factors. Standardization of data-acquisition protocols and definition of minimum requirements for computational modeling will be essential for future collaborative studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.285
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC AdvancesSame topicAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesFrench-language works237,207