MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413754807 · doi:10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102081

Critical Care of the Adult With Congenital Heart Disease

2025· review· en· W4413754807 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Valle, Amanda C. Garfinkel, Jonathan Buber, Anitra Romfh, Andrea Elliott, Jonathan N. Menachem, Jennifer S. Nelson, Peter C. Laussen, Jane Heggie, Cameron Dezfulian, D. John Morrow, Anne Marie Valente

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Advances · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart diseaseIntensive care medicineCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in the treatment of congenital heart disease (CHD) have led to dramatic improvements in survival for individuals with CHD. While adults with CHD represent a small percentage of admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), the critical care needs of this population will grow as this population ages and develops increasingly complex cardiac and noncardiac conditions. Adults with CHD require special care in the ICU because of both their unique cardiovascular conditions and the multi-organ dysfunction that often accompanies their cardiac pathophysiology. This review aims to summarize the current epidemiology of critical care for adults with CHD, describe key physiologic and management considerations in caring for adults with highly complex CHD (eg, Fontan circulation, systemic right ventricle, and Eisenmenger syndrome), identify cardiac and noncardiac risk factors for adverse outcomes following admission to the ICU, and define key research and educational priorities for the future care of this vulnerable population.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.768

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC AdvancesSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207