Cardiac arrhythmias associated with spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT/OBJECTIVES: To review the current literature to reveal the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias and its relation to spinal cord injury (SCI). DATA SOURCE: MEDLINE database, 304 hits, and 32 articles were found to be relevant. The relevant articles all met the inclusion criteria: (1) contained original data (2) on cardiac arrhythmias (3) in humans with (4) traumatic SCI. RESULTS: In the acute phase of SCI (1-14 days after injury) more cranial as well as more severe injuries seemed to increase the incidence of bradycardia. Articles not covering the first 14 days after injury, thus describing the chronic phase of SCI, showed that individuals with SCI did not have a higher incidence of cardiac arrhythmias compared with able-bodied controls. Furthermore, their heart rate did not differ significantly. Penile vibro-stimulation was the procedure investigated most likely to cause bradycardia, which in turn was associated with episodes of autonomic dysreflexia. The incidence of bradycardia was found to be 17-77% for individuals with cervical SCI. For individuals with thoracolumbar SCI, the incidence was 0-13%. CONCLUSION: Bradycardia was commonly seen in the acute stage after SCI as well as during procedures such as penile vibro-stimulation and tracheal suction. These episodes of bradycardia were seen more often in individuals with cervical injuries. Longitudinal studies with continuous electrocardiogram recordings are needed to uncover the true relation between cardiac arrhythmias and SCI.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".