MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092852086 · doi:10.2174/157488607781668873

QT Prolongation and Safety in the Indian Population

2007· article· en· W2092852086 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Drug Safety · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQT intervalProlongationTorsades de pointesVentricular tachycardiaGuidelineCardiologyRepolarizationPopulationVentricular fibrillationSudden cardiac deathIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The QT interval in electrocardiogram (ECG) reflects the total duration of ventricular myocardial depolarization and repolarization. It has been well recognized that many condition may cause QT interval prolongation. Unfortunately, numbers of cardiac and non-cardiac drug prolong the QT interval and cause a distinctive polymorphic ventricular tachycardia termed torsade de pointes (TdP). TdP can degenerate into ventricular fibrillation, which leads to sudden cardiac death. Recently various regulatory and clinical bodies of Europe, USA, Canada and Australia have made their focus on the drugs that induce prolongation of QT interval. Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP) of the European Agency issued a document entitled 'Points to Consider: The assessment of the potential for QT interval prolongation by non-cardiovascular medicinal products' [1, 2]. In addition, USFDA adopted the guideline 'Clinical evaluation of QT/QTc interval prolongation and proarrhythmic potential for non-anti arrhythmic drugs' [3]. These documents and guidelines are primarily concern with development of novel agents and the new use or new dose of already approved drugs. The scope of this guideline is to study the effect of drugs on QT prolongation and give idea of evaluation of drug's effects on QT prolongation. Today more than 50 available drugs (both old and new) have been identify, which prolong the QT interval [1]. Several drugs have been withdrawn from many countries on this basis but many of these drugs are still available in Indian market and potentially creating life-threatening arrhythmias. This article will focus on recommendation of study on the normal limits of QT interval in Indian population and preparation of the database, which can be helpful in withdrawal of drugs from the market that produces QT prolongation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.277 · 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