Impact of Age and Sex on QT Prolongation in Patients Receiving Psychotropics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess older age and female sex, 2 of the major risk factors for potentially fatal cardiac arrhythmias or sudden cardiac death in patients prescribed psychotropics, within the context of electrocardiographic evidence of time between start of Q wave and end of T wave (QT) interval prolongation, which is an indicator of an increased risk for potentially fatal cardiac arrhythmias. METHOD: The literature on the relation between age, sex, and QT interval with respect to psychotropic drugs was reviewed. RESULTS: The QT interval must be corrected (QTc) for heart rate. Because slower heart rates prolong and faster heart rates shorten the QT interval, people with faster heart rates may have a prolonged QT interval that is not apparent until the correction is performed. QTc values for apparently healthy post-pubertal people are less than 450 ms for males and less than 470 ms for females. The longer QT intervals in women may account for their increased risk of potentially fatal cardiac arrhythmias on psychotropics. QTc increases with increasing age. Assessment of QTc in older people is especially important to identify people with a longer QTc who are more likely to attain a serious QT level with drugs that prolong QTc. The age-related increase in QTc is more evident in men than women, suggesting that male sex does not afford protection against potentially fatal arrhythmias at older age. CONCLUSION: The association of increasing age and female sex with greater QT intervals indicates the need to have an increased awareness of the QTc prior to use of these psychotropics and to evaluate the QTc after initiation of therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".