Design and Use of a Quantitative Scale for Measuring Presyncope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Vasovagal syncope is common and distressing. One important symptom is presyncope, but there are no clinimetric measures of this. We developed the Calgary Presyncope Form (CPF) and used it to test whether metoprolol reduces presyncope in a randomized trial. METHODS: The CPF captures the frequency, duration, and severity of presyncope. We administered it to participants in the Prevention of Syncope Trial (POST), a randomized clinical trial that tested the hypothesis that metoprolol reduces syncope and presyncope in adult patients with vasovagal syncope. RESULTS: The CPF was completed by 44 patients on metoprolol and 39 patients on placebo, of a total of 208 subjects. Completion of the CPF for each of the threedimensions was 84-87% in the 83 respondents. Results were centrally distributed in duration and severity dimensions, but not in frequency. Patients had a median of 1.2 presyncopal spells per day, with a median moderate severity, lasting a median 10 minutes. The 3 scales were statistically independent of each other. These results were independent of subject age, and results in all 3 dimensions were stable over the observation period. There was no significant difference between patients on metoprolol and placebo in any dimension. CONCLUSION: The 3-dimensional CPF is simple, easy to use, stable over time, measures 3 independent variables, and documents that metoprolol does not reduce presyncope.
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 | 0.055 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".