MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099115772 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2007.4353297

Stress ECG and Laboratory Database for the Assessment of Diabetic Cardiovascular Autonomic Neuropathy

2007· article· en· W2099115772 on OpenAlexaff
Lersi Quintero, Sara Wong, Ricardo Parra, J. Cruz, Norka Antepara, Deyanira Almeida, Fu Siong Ng, G. Passariello

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersFondo Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovación
KeywordsDatabaseComputer scienceMedical diagnosisDiabetes mellitusMedical recordMATLABMedicineData miningInternal medicinePathologyOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of a diabetic patient database in order to study Cardiovascular Autonomic Neuropathy (CAN) using as a primary source, stress ECG is presented. The selected platform (ecgML) allows user-friendly environment to analyze and interpret graphs, signals and data. It also allows the ability to perform annotations and reports done by users from different fields. In order to feed the database, the input data is codify using MatLab. The database is composed by two populations: 1) Type 2 Diabetes mellitus group and 2) a control group with no medical history of cardiovascular disease. At the present, there are 62 records available from these two groups. The database also contains laboratory parameters, concurrent medical diagnoses reports verified by cardiologists and other clinicians, automatic annotations for each beat and trend series from parameters extracted from the ECG signals such as RR intervals and ST segment measurements. All this information will become very useful for CAN investigations.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference proceedingsSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207