MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sudden Intense Exercise Increases QT Heart Rate Slope and T Wave Complexity in Long QT Syndrome and Normal Subjects

2004· article· en· W2046154029 on OpenAlexaff
Vijay S. Chauhan, Andrew D. Krahn, Peter R. Mitoff, George J. Klein, Allan C. Skanes, Raymond Yee

Bibliographic record

VenuePacing and Clinical Electrophysiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyLong QT syndromeQT intervalHeart rateInternal medicineIntensity (physics)Heart rate variabilityElectrocardiographyBlood pressurePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudden intense physical activity is a trigger for ventricular arrhythmias in long QT syndrome (LQTS), and beta-blockers (B) reduce the risk of ventricular arrhythmias in LQTS. We compared the effect of graded (gradual intensity) versus burst (sudden intensity) exercise on QT-rate adaptation and T wave complexity in LQTS + B (n = 21), LQTS - B (n = 5), and normal controls (n = 20). Graded exercise consisted of symptom-limited bicycle ergometry (30 W, increment 20 W/min). Burst exercise involved a fixed 200 W load for 1.0 minute. ECGs were digitally recorded every 10 seconds during exercise and a 10 minute recovery period. QT-rate adaptation was quantified using the slope of the QT cycle length relationship fit to a quadratic function. Principle component analysis (PCA) was used to quantify T wave complexity. The QT-rate slope was two-fold greater with burst exercise than graded exercise for LQTS + B (-82E +/- 40E vs -36E +/- 40E, P = 0.0016), LQTS - B (-85E +/- 60E vs -30E +/- 50E, P = 0.011) and controls (-100E +/- 60E vs -48E +/- 100E, P = 0.0011) (E = x10(-5)). For each exercise protocol, there was no difference in QT-rate slope between the three groups. In contrast, the QT-rate slope during the 10 minute recovery period was similar between the burst and graded protocol for LQTS + B (25E +/- 40E vs 30E +/- 50E), LQTS - B (81E +/- 80E vs 85E +/- 70E) and controls (90E +/- 80E vs 82E +/- 80E). The coefficient of variability of PCA (T wave complexity variability) during burst exercise was greater than that during graded exercise for LQTS + B (41 +/- 15 vs 30 +/- 10, P = 0.017), LQTS - B (47 +/- 25 vs 26 +/- 4, P = 0.016), and control (46 +/- 14 vs 33 +/- 19, P = 0.012). For each exercise protocol, no difference in T wave complexity variability was seen between the three groups. In conclusion, QT heart rate slope and T wave complexity variability are greater during sudden intense exercise than graded exercise in LQTS patients (on and off beta-blockers) and normal subjects, with similar findings among the three groups of patients.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacing and Clinical ElectrophysiologySame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207