MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045352484 · doi:10.1088/0967-3334/32/6/001

Evaluation of a subject-specific transfer-function-based nonlinear QT interval rate-correction method

2011· article· en· W2045352484 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Measurement · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsQT intervalRepolarizationStatisticsAlgorithmCardiologyInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The QT interval in the electrocardiogram (ECG) is a measure of total duration of depolarization and repolarization. Correction for heart rate is necessary to provide a single intrinsic physiological value that can be compared between subjects and within the same subject under different conditions. Standard formulas for the corrected QT (QTc) do not fully reproduce the complexity of the dependence in the preceding interbeat intervals (RR) and inter-subject variability. In this paper, a subject-specific, nonlinear, transfer function-based correction method is formulated to compute the QTc from Holter ECG recordings. The model includes five parameters: three describing the static QT-RR relationship and two representing memory/hysteresis effects that intervene in the calculation of effective RR values. The parameter identification procedure is designed to minimize QTc fluctuations and enforce zero correlation between QTc and effective RR. Weighted regression is used to better handle unbalanced or skewed RR distributions. The proposed optimization approach provides a general mathematical framework for further extensions of the model. Validation, robustness evaluation and comparison with existing QT correction formulas is performed on ECG signals recorded during sinus rhythm, atrial pacing, tilt-table tests, stress tests and atrial flutter (29 subjects in total). The resulting average modeling error on the QTc is 4.9 ± 1.1 ms with a sampling interval of 2 ms, which outperforms correction formulas currently used. The results demonstrate the benefits of subject-specific rate correction and hysteresis reduction.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.169
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.151 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it