Responsiveness of AF6, a new, short, validated, atrial fibrillation-specific questionnaire—symptomatic benefit of direct current cardioversion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To measure the effects on symptoms of electrical cardioversion (DC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) by means of a new, short, validated, AF-specific questionnaire, the AF6. METHODS: One hundred eleven patients (67 ± 12 years, 89 men) were screened before and 12 ± 3 days after DC using AF6, covering 'breathing difficulties at rest', 'breathing difficulties on exertion', 'limitations in day-to-day life due to atrial fibrillation', 'feeling of discomfort due to atrial fibrillation', 'tiredness due to atrial fibrillation', and 'worry/anxiety due to atrial fibrillation'. A single global score was calculated. The Toronto AF Symptoms and Severity Check List (AFSS) and the generic SF-36 were also administered. Patients in sinus rhythm at 12 ± 3 days (n = 56) were defined as responders and patients in AF (n = 55) as non-responders. RESULTS: The mean single global score decreased in all patients (18 ± 12.4 to 13 ± 11.6, p < 0.0001) and in responders (22 ± 14 vs. 12 ± 12, p < 0.01) but not in non-responders (14 ± 9 vs. 14 ± 11, N.S). The AFSS frequency scores decreased from 14.5 ± 7.7 to 9.5 ± 7.8 in responders, p = 0.001, but not in non-responders. There was a strong correlation between changes in the AF6 and the SF-36 regarding four of the six items. Effect sizes of AF6 ranged from 0 to 0.52 in all patients, in responders from 0.10 to 0.85 and in non-responders from -0.23 to 0.34, the highest figures consistently referring to 'tiredness due to atrial fibrillation'. CONCLUSIONS: The symptom scores measured by AF6 decreased significantly, especially in responders. AF6 demonstrated adequate responsiveness to change, and effect sizes were mostly moderate, in responders moderate to high.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".