MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098785649

Corresponding Author:

2015· article· en· W7098785649 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Processing and 3D Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionHypertrophic cardiomyopathyGenotypeGenotypingCardiomyopathy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2 Background- Genotyping in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) has gained increasing attention in the past decade. Its major role is for family screening, and only rarely influences decision-making processes in any individual patient. It is associated with substantial costs, and cost-effectiveness can only be achieved in the presence of high detection rates for disease-causing sarcomere protein gene mutations. Therefore, our aim was to develop a score based on clinical and echocardiographic variables that allows prediction of the probability of a positive genotype. Methods and Results- Clinical and echocardiographic variables were collected in 471 consecutive patients undergoing genetic testing at a tertiary referral center between July 2005 and November 2010. Logistic regression for a positive genotype was employed to construct integer risk weights for each independent predictor variable. These were summed for each patient to create the Toronto HCM genotype score. A positive genotype was found in 163/471

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Processing and 3D ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207