MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6920536621 · doi:10.60692/yn904-vmx76

Quantitative aortography for assessment of aortic regurgitation in the era of percutaneous aortic valve replacement

2023· article· en· W6920536621 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegurgitation (circulation)AortographyVentricular outflow tractValve replacementPercutaneousCardiac catheterizationBalloonAortic valve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paravalvular leak (PVL) is a shortcoming that can erode the clinical benefits of transcatheter valve replacement (TAVR) and therefore a readily applicable method (aortography) to quantitate PVL objectively and accurately in the interventional suite is appealing to all operators. The ratio between the areas of the time-density curves in the aorta and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT-AR) defines the regurgitation fraction (RF). This technique has been validated in a mock circulation; a single injection in diastole was further tested in porcine and ovine models. In the clinical setting, LVOT-AR was compared with trans-thoracic and trans-oesophageal echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. LVOT-AR > 17% discriminates mild from moderate aortic regurgitation on echocardiography and confers a poor prognosis in multiple registries, and justifies balloon post-dilatation. The LVOT-AR differentiates the individual performances of many old and novel devices and is being used in ongoing randomized trials and registries.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→