MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416253820 · doi:10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.11.001

Defining ascending aorta dilatation in pediatric bicuspid aortic valve: Comparison of known classical and new z-score nomograms, and anthropometric parameters indexing for its assessment

2025· article· en· W4416253820 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaSociedad Española de Cardiología
KeywordsConcordanceAscending aortaNomogramBicuspid aortic valveAnthropometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Ascending aorta (AscAo) dilatation assessment and definition in pediatric bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is challenging. We compared the Pediatric Heart Network (PHN) nomogram against the Halifax (HZ) one and analyzed their association with body surface area indexing (BSAI). Methods Echocardiographies from a national BAV registry were analyzed. AscAo and sinus of Valsalva, standardized using nomograms and BSAI, were compared by correlation and Bland-Altman tests. Nomogram +2 and + 3 z-scores thresholds contrasted against >21 mm/BSA-m2 by logistic regression and kappa agreement index. Age subgroup analysis was between adult-size (≥10 years and BSA ≥1.5 m 2 ) and small children. Results A total 3858 reports were analyzed. The PHN nomogram resulted in higher AscAo z-scores (median 1.516 versus 1.413). Nomogram correlation was Rho Spearman = 0.979 and Bland-Altman agreement bias was 0.302, with higher divergence in extreme z-scores. Patients ≥10 years and BSA ≥1.5 m 2 showed better concordance (bias −0.212 versus 0.440) despite similar correlation to the younger group. There was moderate but significant correlation amongst AscAo BSA-indexed diameters and PHN (Rho Spearman = 0.514, p < 0.001) and HZ nomograms (Rho Spearman = 0.366, p < 0.001), being higher in the older cohort than the younger, both by PHN (Rho Spearmam 0.961 versus 0.424) and HZ (Rho Spearman 0.952 versus 0.540). Higher area under the curve was obtained by PHN. A lower percentage was classified as dilated with PHN than by BSA-I in the adult-size cohort, but not in younger patients. Discussion There was good correlation and concordance between HZ and PHN nomograms, the latter resulting in higher z-scores. PHN has better agreement with BSA-I than HZ, with the PHN > +3 z-score threshold being the highest predictor for BSA-I dilatation definition, also showing higher specificity and sensitivity. BSA-I classified fewer patients as dilated than nomograms in adult-sized children but not in the younger cohort. Clinicians should be aware of this effect of BSA when normalizing diameters.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.328 · 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