MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systematic Review: Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators for Adults with Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction

2007· review· en· W1963699212 on OpenAlex
Justin A. Ezekowitz, Brian H. Rowe, Donna M Dryden, Nicola Hooton, Ben Vandermeer, Carol Spooner, Finlay A. McAlister

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialHeart failureCardiologyImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorCardiac resynchronization therapyEjection fraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction have an increased risk for ventricular arrhythmias. PURPOSE: To summarize the evidence about benefits and harms of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in adult patients with LV systolic dysfunction. DATA SOURCES: A search of electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration reports) from 1980 through April 2007, not limited by language of publication, was supplemented by hand searches and contact with study authors and device manufacturers. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently selected studies on the basis of prespecified criteria. They selected 12 randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) (8516 patients) that reported on mortality and 76 observational studies (96 951 patients) that examined safety or effectiveness. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted in duplicate and independently by 2 reviewers. DATA SYNTHESIS: In adult patients with LV systolic dysfunction, 86% of whom had New York Heart Association class II or III symptoms, ICDs reduced all-cause mortality by 20% (95% CI, 10% to 29%) in the RCTs and by 46% (CI, 32% to 57%) in the observational studies. Death associated with implantation of ICDs occurred during 1.2% (CI, 0.9% to 1.5%) of procedures. The frequency of postimplantation complications per 100 patient-years included 1.4 (CI, 1.2 to 1.6) device malfunctions, 1.5 (CI, 1.3 to 1.8) lead problems, and 0.6 (CI, 0.5 to 0.8) site infection. Rates of inappropriate discharges per 100 patient-years ranged from 19.1 (CI, 16.5 to 22.0) in RCTs to 4.9 (CI, 4.5 to 5.3) in observational studies. LIMITATIONS: Studies were of short duration and infrequently reported nonfatal outcomes. Few studies evaluated dual-chamber ICDs. Lack of individual-patient data prevents identification of subgroup-specific effects. CONCLUSIONS: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators are efficacious in reducing mortality for adult patients with LV systolic dysfunction, and this benefit extends to nontrial populations. Improved risk stratification tools to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from ICD are needed.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.319 · 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