Bibliographic record
Abstract
E stimates of the incidence of electrical storm (ES) range from 4% over 20.6 months of follow-up in patients with primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) 1 to 20% over 31 months of follow-up in a population with secondary prophylactic ICDs. 2 Although smaller observational series have not identified a clear mortality risk associated with ES, 3,4 larger and more recent series have suggested a large and significant association between repeated ventricular arrhythmic events and death, both sudden and nonsudden.[5][6][7][8] It is unclear whether this adverse outcome is a result of repeated ICD shocks or whether recurrent arrhythmias are a marker of sicker hearts that are destined to do poorly.Indeed, the mode of death after ES frequently is related to heart failure.Uncertainty has thus remained about whether interventions for ES can influence mortality beyond the acute period.9 In this issue of Circulation, Carbucicchio and colleagues 10 describe a large series of patients who underwent catheter ablation after presenting acutely with ES refractory to antiarrhythmic medications.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".