MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088666701 · doi:10.1155/2012/746709

How Are n-3 LCPUFAs Antiarrhythmic? A Reassessment of n-3 LCPUFAs in Cardiac Disease

2012· article· en· W2088666701 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research and Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of OntarioHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsDocosahexaenoic acidEicosapentaenoic acidMedicineClinical trialPolyunsaturated fatty acidDiseaseBioinformaticsPharmacologyInternal medicineFatty acidBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-chain n-3-polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 LCPUFAs), referring particularly to marine-derived eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), have been shown to be effective in treating arrhythmias in some clinical trials and animal studies. The mechanism for this effect of n-3 LCPUFAs is not well understood. Experimental studies and clinical trials published in the 1980s and 1990s suggested that n-3 LCPUFAs may be antiarrhythmic drugs, but more recent trials have not confirmed this. In this paper, we examine evidence for, and against, the direct antiarrhythmic action of n-3 LCPUFAs and suggest that antistructural remodeling effects of n-3 LCPUFAs may be more relevant in accounting for their clinical effects.

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.320 · 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