MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094662185 · doi:10.1161/circep.109.907865

Utility of Treadmill Testing in Identification and Genotype Prediction in Long-QT Syndrome

2010· article· en· W2094662185 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLong QT syndromeIdentification (biology)GenotypeInternal medicineTreadmillCardiologyQT intervalGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The clinical diagnosis of long-QT syndrome (LQTS) remains challenging when ECG abnormalities are borderline or intermittent. Despite issues with access, cost, and heterogeneity of LQTS mutations, genetic testing remains the diagnostic gold standard for diagnosis of LQTS. We sought to develop a provocative testing strategy to unmask the LQTS phenotype and relate this to the results of genetic testing. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 1995 to 2008, 159 consecutive patients with suspected LQTS underwent provocative testing that consisted of a modified Bruce protocol treadmill exercise test, with ECGs recorded supine at rest, immediately on standing, and at 1-minute intervals during exercise, at peak exercise, and at 1-minute intervals during the recovery phase. Similar testing was carried out on a stationary bike in a gradual and burst exercise fashion. LQTS was confirmed with genotyping in all 95 affected LQTS patients and excluded with negative family screening in 64 control subjects. Patients were studied before and after initiation of beta-blockers. Of 159 patients, 50 had an LQT1 mutation and 45 had an LQT2 mutation. In the LQTS group, 44.3% of patients had a normal-to-borderline resting QTc interval. LQTS patients exhibited a greater prolongation in QTc with postural change than unaffected patients (LQT1: 40 ms [IQR, 42]; LQT2: 35 ms [IQR, 46]; and LQTS-negative: 21 ms [IQR, 37]; P=0.029). During exercise, LQT1 patients had marked QTc prolongation compared with LQT2 and LQTS-negative patients (LQT1: 65 ms [60], LQT2: 3 ms [46], LQTS negative: 5 ms [41]; P<0.0001). QT hysteresis was more pronounced in patients with LQT2 mutations compared with LQT1 and LQT-negative patients (LQT2: 40 ms [10], LQT1: 15 ms [40]; LQTS-negative: 20 ms [20]; P<0.001). beta-Blockade normalized the QTc changes seen with standing and QT hysteresis. CONCLUSIONS: The presence and genotype of LQTS can be predicted by a combination of postural and exercise changes in the QT/RR relationship. beta-Blockade normalized these changes. Routine exercise testing is useful in predicting and directing genetic testing in LQTS.

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)0.000
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 score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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