Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experimental studies demonstrate that granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) stimulates neovascularisation and confers cardiomyocyte protection. Early clinical studies, however, have yielded conflicting results and the safety and efficacy of G-CSF in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease (IHD) remains unclear. This thesis evaluates the efficacy of G-CSF and exercise in mobilising bone marrow endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) and improving ischaemia in patients with severe chronic IHD. In addition, we examine the reproducibility of myocardial perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). Chapter 3 documents the low inter-study and observer variability for adenosine perfusion CMR with small sample sizes predicted for studies utilising this technique to detect changes in myocardial perfusion. We estimate for our placebo-controlled crossover trial of GCSF, 6 and 15 patients would have 90 % power (α, 0.05) to detect, respectively, a two-segment change in ischaemic myocardial segments and a 0.2 change in myocardial perfusion reserve index. Chapters 4 and 5 document results from a placebo-controlled double-blind crossover trial of G-CSF versus placebo with exercise, completed by 18 patients with Canadian Cardiovascular Society Class III or IV angina. G-CSF (4.5 μg/kg sc) or placebo was administered daily for five consecutive days at fortnightly intervals for three cycles, followed by crossover six weeks later. Primary outcome was myocardial perfusion by CMR. Secondary outcomes were Seattle Angina and Utility-Based Quality of life-Heart
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".