Fluctuating QTc interval in an asymptomatic patient treated with methadone for chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prolongation of the QT interval associated with ventricular arrhythmias has been the most common cause of the restriction or withdrawal of drugs from the market in the past 10 years. Methadone, a synthetic opioid that is increasingly used for the management of chronic pain, has recently been implicated in the development of the prolonged QT syndrome. We present a case report of a patient who developed a prolonged QT while being treated with oral methadone for a chronic pain syndrome. Of particular interest in this patient is the fluctuation of the QT interval at a stable dose of methadone, suggesting that a single normal electrocardiogram (ECG) does not guarantee that the patient is not at risk of ventricular arrhythmias. After reviewing the current literature, we suggest that there is no dose of methadone that may be considered to be completely safe. Other risk factors for prolonged QT interval such as underlying cardiac abnormalities, electrolyte disturbances, and concurrent medications should be sought, and all patients should be monitored with serial ECGs even when methadone doses remain stable.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".