Insertable Loop Recorder Use for Detection of Intermittent Arrhythmias
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
The advent of prolonged monitoring with the implanted loop recorders has revolutionized the quest for detection of elusive infrequent arrhythmias in patients with unexplained syncope. The capability of prolonged monitoring has permitted us to obtain symptom rhythm correlation in the majority of patients suspected to have underlying infrequent arrhythmia. The implanted loop recorder is easily implanted in the left pectoral region with a minimally invasive procedure, providing at least 14 months of continuous monitoring that is both patient and automatically activated. Several recent studies suggest that it plays a major role in patients with infrequent symptoms and suspected arrhythmia, including patients with syncope and conduction disturbances, mild to moderate underlying heart disease, and atypical epilepsy. In a randomized trial, the device was found to be cost-effective and improved diagnostic yield compared to conventional tilt and electrophysiological testing. Wider application of prolonged monitoring is ongoing, including assessment of ventricular arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, and conduction disturbances. The implantable loop recorder is most useful in patients with infrequent unexplained syncope when noninvasive testing is negative.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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