Defibrillators and Sudden Death
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Letters16 December 2003Defibrillators and Sudden DeathJustin A. Ezekowitz, MBBCh, Finlay A. McAlister, MD, and Paul W. Armstrong, MDJustin A. Ezekowitz, MBBChFrom University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H7, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Finlay A. McAlister, MDFrom University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H7, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, and Paul W. Armstrong, MDFrom University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H7, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-139-12-200312160-w2 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:We disagree with Dr. Cohn's assertion that MADIT II should not be incorporated into the clinical decision-making process and should thus have been excluded from our meta-analysis of implantable cardioverter defibrillators in patients at increased risk for sudden cardiac death. The presence of ventricular ectopic beats on a Holter monitor was initially an inclusion criterion for MADIT II. However, after 23 patients were recruited, the executive committee eliminated this criterion (1). Because those 23 patients represent less than 2% of the total enrolled sample in MADIT II, we believe their inclusion would only minimally influence interpretation of the ...Reference1. Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ, Klein H, Wilber DJ, Cannom DS, . Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:877-83. [PMID: 11907286] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H7, Canada. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics 16 December 2003Volume 139, Issue 12Page: W-85KeywordsImplantable cardioverter defibrillatorsSudden cardiac death ePublished: 16 December 2003 Issue Published: 16 December 2003 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2003 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.009 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".