Prevention of Syncope Trial (POST): a randomized clinical trial of beta blockers in the prevention of vasovagal syncope Rationale and study design
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
BACKGROUND: Few therapies for vasovagal syncope have been proven effective. A large, placebo-controlled clinical trial of beta-blockers is needed. STRUCTURE OF STUDY: The Prevention of Syncope Trial (POST) is a multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, study of metoprolol in the prevention of vasovagal syncope. The primary hypothesis is that beta-blockers will increase the time to the first recurrence of syncope when compared with placebo. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive metoprolol or placebo, and followed for 1 year. The primary endpoint is the time to first syncope recurrence, and secondary endpoints include syncope frequency, presyncope, and quality of life. INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients are eligible if they have a positive tilt test and 3 syncopal spells preceding the tilt test. They are excluded if they have seizures or other causes of syncope; important heart disease; a contraindication to or need for beta blockers; a permanent pacemaker; a major noncardiovascular disease; or previous use of beta blockers at a dose greater than the equivalent of metoprolol 25mg twice daily for the purpose of suppressing vasovagal syncope. POWER CALCULATIONS: We assume a 40% risk of syncope in the control arm, an absolute reduction of 20% by metoprolol, and a dropout of 20%. Entry of 220 patients will result in an 80% chance of reaching a positive conclusion about beta-blocker therapy with 2p=0.05.
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 | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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