MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415661127 · doi:10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf135

Right ventricular dysfunction in structural tricuspid interventions

2025· review· en· W4415661127 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Lee, Eirini Beneki, Nikolaos Katsanakis, Edoardo Zancanaro, Monica Mukherjee, Edgar Argulian, Julia Grapsa

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Imaging Methods and Practice · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTricuspid valveRight heartContext (archaeology)Psychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Ventricular functionRight heart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing global adoption of transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI) and the increasing number of available devices, a comprehensive understanding of right heart dysfunction has become essential. Right heart dysfunction is frequently observed both before and after TTVI and is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Therefore, a thorough understanding of right heart anatomy and physiology is critical for accurately assessing its pathological states. This review synthesizes current knowledge by integrating findings from major landmark studies on TTVI, with a focus on the available assessment tools for predicting patient outcomes. The anatomy section systematically reviews each component of the right heart-the right atrium, right ventricle, tricuspid valve, and pulmonary valve -while the physiology section emphasizes microstructural characteristics and the pressure-volume relationships. In addition, recommendations from the Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium and the imaging parameters used in recent studies are discussed. Finally, future directions for imaging-based assessment of right heart function in the context of TTVI are highlighted.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Imaging Methods and PracticeSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207