MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1728657678 · doi:10.2147/tacg.s55762

Genetics of inherited primary arrhythmia disorders

2015· review· en· W1728657678 on OpenAlexaff
Michael H. Gollob, Danna Spears

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Application of Clinical Genetics · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardiaBrugada syndromeMedicineShort QT syndromeGenetic testingSudden cardiac deathLong QT syndromeSudden deathHeart diseaseDiseaseGenetic disorderAbnormalityCardiologyInternal medicineQT intervalRyanodine receptor 2Psychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sudden unexplained death is felt to be due to a primary arrhythmic disorder when no structural heart disease is found on autopsy, and there is no preceding documentation of heart disease. In these cases, death is presumed to be secondary to a lethal and potentially heritable abnormality of cardiac ion channel function. These channelopathies include congenital long QT syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, Brugada syndrome, and short QT syndrome. In certain cases, genetic testing may have an important role in supporting a diagnosis of a primary arrhythmia disorder, and can also provide prognostic information, but by far the greatest strength of genetic testing lies in the screening of family members, who may be at risk. The purpose of this review is to describe the basic genetic and molecular pathophysiology of the primary inherited arrhythmia disorders, and to outline a rational approach to genetic testing, management, and family screening.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Application of Clinical GeneticsSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207