MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068912541 · doi:10.1097/hco.0b013e3283336d52

Persistent atrial fibrillation: current approach and controversies

2009· review· en· W2068912541 on OpenAlexaff
Ratika Parkash, Atul Verma, Antony Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Cardiology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsRoyal Jubilee HospitalSouthlake Regional Health CenterQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationMedicineCatheter ablationCardiologyManagement of atrial fibrillationInternal medicineAblationIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To address the changing definition of atrial fibrillation as it reflects the major paradigm shift in the comprehension of mechanisms underlying atrial fibrillation and the possible treatment options targeting persistent atrial fibrillation. RECENT FINDINGS: Persistent atrial fibrillation exists in a spectrum that is linked to paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The mechanism underlying persistent atrial fibrillation has evolved significantly but requires further understanding in order to improve its management. The role of external factors, such as blood pressure, on the development of persistent atrial fibrillation and its underlying substrate require further exploration. Catheter ablation has evolved significantly but controversy remains regarding the optimal approach for persistent atrial fibrillation. SUMMARY: The definition of atrial fibrillation has evolved significantly as a result of knowledge gathered from therapy with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Further trials are required to investigate the causes, mechanisms and optimal therapies for persistent atrial fibrillation.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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

Citations45
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in CardiologySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207