MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414476569 · doi:10.3390/jcdd12100376

Beyond Conventional Meta-Analysis: A Meta-Learning Model to Predict Cohort-Level Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR)

2025· review· en· W4414476569 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yamil Liscano, Darly Martínez Guevara, Gustavo Andrés Urriago-Osorio, Juan Carlos Quintana

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad Santiago de Cali
KeywordsValve replacementInterventional cardiologyRisk assessmentAortic valveAortic valve replacement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context and Objective: Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) mortality exhibits extreme heterogeneity that conventional meta-analyses fail to explain, limiting the clinical utility of evidence synthesis and hindering accurate prognostic assessment. This study evaluated whether meta-learning, using aggregate data from the literature, can predict cohort-level mortality and identify its determinants, overcoming the limitations of traditional methods to provide a clearer understanding of the factors driving TAVR outcomes. Methods: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted across five databases. Methodological quality was assessed with standardized tools (Risk of Bias 2, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Exposure). After performing conventional meta-analyses and meta-regressions, multiple machine learning models were trained using study-level characteristics as predictors. Advanced optimization with regularization and ensemble techniques was applied to develop a final, optimized model. Results: Fifty-eight studies, encompassing over 533,000 patients, were included. Traditional meta-analysis confirmed extreme heterogeneity (I2 = 76.7% in Random Clinical Trials, 96.8% in observational studies), with no explanatory power via meta-regression. The initial AdaBoost model achieved R2 = 0.191, outperforming 17 alternative algorithms. Advanced optimization developed a Blend_Optimized model that explained 65.3% of the variability (R2 = 0.653), marking a substantial 46 percentage-point increase. Interpretability analysis identified four dominant predictors: Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Operative Mortality (R2 = 0.300), Recruitment Year (R2 = 0.212), % Transfemoral (R2 = 0.201), and % Diabetes (R2 = 0.175), revealing a potent temporal gradient reflecting the evolution of medical practice. Conclusions: Meta-learning significantly surpasses traditional methods in extracting systematic signals from heterogeneous evidence. This study demonstrates that, in addition to patient risk factors, a significant temporal gradient models technological evolution and learning curves. The methodology transforms seemingly unexplained heterogeneity into clinically interpretable patterns, demonstrating the potential of meta-learning as a complementary tool for evidence synthesis in interventional cardiology and opening avenues for applications in other complex cardiovascular fields. Important Limitation: This model predicts cohort-level outcomes and should not be used for individual risk assessment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.104
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular Development and DiseaseSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207