Association of P‐Wave Duration, Dispersion, and Terminal Force in Relation to P‐Wave Axis among Outpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While P-wave duration (P-dur) and dispersion (P-disp) could both reflect fractionated and inhomogeneous propagation of sinus cardiac impulses, and may therefore be associated with each other, a clear relationship has not been extensively studied. We studied these markers as well as the significance of P-wave terminal force in lead V1 (PTFV1) in relation to the P-wave axis (P-axis). METHODS: We appraised our previously studied sample of 500 consecutively numbered, otherwise unselected, electrocardiograms (ECGs) of outpatients from the University of Massachusetts, Worcester, Massachusetts, for the foregoing P-wave characteristics. P-disp, defined as the difference of the duration between the widest and narrowest P wave, and the greatest P-dur after a 12-lead ECG search, was measured manually to the nearest 10 ms. PTFV1 was considered positive when > or = 40 mm2 terminal deflection was present on biphasic P waves on lead V1. Normal P-axis was considered 0 degrees to +75 degrees by manually constructing the mean frontal plane electrical P-axis from standard limb leads. RESULTS: After excluding those with atrial arrhythmias, paced rhythms, errors in lead placement, P waves with low amplitude or overall technically poor tracing, 428 ECGs formed our final sample. P-dur was strongly associated with P-disp (P < 0.0001), but the correlation remained weak (r = 0.42). Overall, P-dur was not significantly associated with P-axis but when divided into tertiles and quintiles, the significance was evident within the range of the normal P-axis, particularly 0 degrees to +60 degrees (P < 0.0001). In a subanalysis of 380 ECGs that had appreciable biphasic P waves on lead V1, PTFV1 was noted on 178 (47%) ECGs and was significantly associated with P-dur (P < 0.0001), P-disp (P < 0.0001), and P-axis (P = 002). When considering P-axis in tertiles and quintiles, P-dur was greater in patients with a positive PTFV1 and significant within the normal range of the P-axis, especially from 0 degrees to +60 degrees . CONCLUSION: P-dur, P-disp, and PTFV1 appear to share a significant tripartite association in relation to the normal P-axis, particularly when P-axis ranges 0 degrees to +60 degrees . Therefore, for optimal clinical assessment, these markers should be evaluated in relation to the normal P-axis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".