MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414437427 · doi:10.1016/j.yjcafi.2025.07.002

The Training Program as a Catalyst for Clinical Trials in Cardiac Critical Care: The DOREMI Experience

2025· article· en· W4414437427 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Mathew, Pietro Di Santo, Benjamin Hibbert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiac Failure - Intersections · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical trialTraining (meteorology)Clinical PracticeMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The morbidity and mortality rates associated with cardiogenic shock remain unacceptably high; physicians caring for these patients need to use novel and innovative methods to identify evidence-based therapies to improve their care. Trainee-led pragmatic clinical trials are one strategy that can overcome many of the identified obstacles faced when undertaking clinical trials in the cardiac intensive care unit. We present our approach to executing the CAPITAL DOREMI (Dobutamine as compared to Milrinone in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock) trial as an example of how a trainee-led prospective randomized controlled trial can be successfully implemented in this high-risk cohort of patients, can serve as a model for future studies and for building a culture of mentorship within the growing area of critical-care cardiology.

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)0.150
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.116
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1500.116
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.018
Research integrity0.0050.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiac Failure - IntersectionsSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207