Pharmacological strategies for prevention of postoperative atrial fibrillation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) complicating cardiac surgery continues to be a major problem that increases the postoperative risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and costs and can affect long-term survival. The incidence of AF after surgery has not significantly changed over the last two decades, despite improvement in medical and surgical techniques. The mechanism and pathophysiology underlying postoperative AF (PoAF) is incompletely understood and results from a combination of acute and chronic factors, superimposed on an underlying abnormal atrial substrate with increased interstitial fibrosis. Several anti-arrhythmic and non-anti-arrhythmic medications have been used for the prevention of PoAF, but the effectiveness of these strategies has been limited due to a poor understanding of the basis for the increased susceptibility of the atria to AF in the postoperative setting. In this review, we summarize the pathophysiology underlying the development of PoAF and evidence behind pharmacological approaches used for its prevention in the postoperative setting.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it