Effect of Metoprolol on Quality of Life in the Prevention of Syncope Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Vasovagal syncope is common, often recurrent, and reduces quality of life. No therapies have proven useful to improve quality of life in adequately designed randomized clinical trials. Beta-blockers have mixed evidence for effectiveness in preventing syncope. METHODS: The Prevention of Syncope Trial was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multinational, clinical trial that tested the hypothesis that metoprolol improves quality of life in adult patients with vasovagal syncope in a 1-year observation period. Randomization was stratified in strata of patients <42 and > or =42 years old. The quality of life questionnaires Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Euroqol EQ-5D were completed at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of treatment by 204, 132, and 121 patients, respectively. RESULTS: There were 208 patients, mean age 42 +/- 18, of whom 134 (64%) were females. All had positive tilt tests. There was no improvement in quality of life during the trial in the entire group or in either treatment arm. Patients in the metoprolol treatment arm did not have improved quality of life compared to the patients in the placebo arm using either the SF-36 or EQ5D after either 6 or 12 months. Finally, there was no improvement in quality of life associated with metoprolol use in patients either <42 or > or =42 years of age. CONCLUSION: Metoprolol does not improve quality of life in patients with recurrent vasovagal syncope and a positive tilt test.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".