MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414981134 · doi:10.1111/echo.70309

Echocardiographic Features of Cardiomyopathies: A Comprehensive Review

2025· review· en· W4414981134 on OpenAlexaff
Ghassan Al-Naami

Bibliographic record

VenueEchocardiography · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Medical AssociationUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiomyopathyHypertrophic cardiomyopathyDilated cardiomyopathyRestrictive cardiomyopathyClinical PracticeModality (human–computer interaction)Heart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiomyopathies represent a heterogeneous group of myocardial diseases characterized by structural and functional abnormalities that can lead to heart failure, arrhythmias, and sudden cardiac death. Echocardiography remains the first-line, non-invasive imaging modality for the evaluation of cardiomyopathies, owing to its broad availability, safety profile, and diagnostic versatility. This review comprehensively outlines the echocardiographic features associated with the major morphofunctional subtypes of cardiomyopathy: dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM), arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), and left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy (LVNC). Emphasis is placed on both adult and pediatric populations, with attention to age-specific diagnostic criteria and measurement standards. The article also includes structured tabular summaries to facilitate clinical interpretation and application across diverse patient settings. Through an integrated and standardized echocardiographic approach, this review aims to support accurate diagnosis, effective monitoring, and informed therapeutic decision-making in the management of cardiomyopathies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.023
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.319 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEchocardiographySame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207