MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A routine electrocardiogram cannot be used to determine the size of myocardial infarction in the rat

2005· article· en· W2082177586 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A.M.M. Bonilha, Roberto Magalhães Saraiva, Rosemeire M. Kanashiro‐Takeuchi, Leslie Andrews Portes, Ednei Luiz Antônio, Paulo José Ferreira Tucci

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoUniversidade de São PauloFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloYork University
KeywordsMedicineQRS complexCardiologyVentricleMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineElectrocardiographyInfarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nine lead electrocardiograms of non-infarcted (N = 61) and infarcted (N = 71) female Wistar rats (200-250 g) were analyzed in order to distinguish left ventricle myocardial infarction (MI) larger than 40% (LMI) from MI smaller than 40% (SMI). MI larger than 40% clearly caused a deviation of AQRS and AT from normal values of 270-360 degrees to 90-270 degrees. Infarcted rats showed Q wave in D1 larger than 1 mm with 94% sensitivity and 100% specificity. The sum of QRS positivity in V1, V2 and V6 lower than 10 mm identified MI with 82% sensitivity and 100% specificity. The data showed that MI can be easily and reliably diagnosed by electrocardiogram in the rat. However, contradicting what is frequently believed, when specificity and sensitivity were analyzed focusing on MI size, none of these current electrocardiographic indices of MI size adequately discriminates LMI from SMI.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.313 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrazilian Journal of Medical and Biological ResearchSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207