MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058688148 · doi:10.1017/s1047951106001090

Current state of the art for use of pacemakers and defibrillators in patients with congenital cardiac malformations

2006· review· en· W2058688148 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth A. Stephenson, Jonathan R. Kaltman

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology in the Young · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBradycardiaCardiologyCardiac pacingInternal medicineCongenital malformationsVentricular tachycardiaHeart diseaseCardiac electrophysiologyIntensive care medicineElectrophysiologyHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As patients with congenital cardiac malformations increasingly survive therapeutic interventions, and our understanding of primary electrical diseases increases, the landscape of paediatric and congenital electrophysiology is expanding. Electrophysiologic abnormalities, both tachycardic and bradycardic, are commonly seen in post-operative patients with congenital cardiac disease, as well as being part of the natural history of congenital malformations and cardiomyopathies. Disturbances of rhythm represent an increasing morbidity in this population, and therapies using devices in the form of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators have taken on a correspondingly important role. In this review, we discuss some of the key features and recent advances in pacing for bradycardia, resynchronization pacing, anti-tachycardia pacing, and use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology in the YoungSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207