The World Survey of Cardiac Pacing and Cardioverter Defibrillators: Calendar Year 2001
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A worldwide cardiac pacing and ICD survey was undertaken for calendar year 2001. Fifty countries, 22 from Europe, 16 from the Asia Pacific region, 3 from the Middle East and Africa, and 9 from the Americas contributed to the survey. The United States had by far the largest number of cardiac pacemaker implants, although Germany had the highest new implants per million population. Virtually all countries that participated in the 1997 survey showed significant increases in implant numbers over the 4 years. High degree atrioventricular block and sick sinus syndrome remain the major indications for implantation of a cardiac pacemaker with < 2% biventricular pacing in those countries that implanted such systems in 2001. There remains a high percentage of VVIR pacing in the developing countries with only a few countries using substantial numbers of single lead VDD and AAIR systems. There has been an increase in the use of DDDR systems in most countries since the 1997 survey. Pacing leads were predominantly transvenous, bipolar, and passive fixation. There was an increased use of active-fixation leads in the atrium. There was a significant rise in the use of ICDs with the largest usage occurring in the United States. A group of enthusiastic survey coordinators has now been established. Recruitment of new countries will hopefully continue to obtain a fully global experience of cardiac pacing and ICD usage.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".