MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106598802 · doi:10.1109/cic.2000.898539

A method for detection of atrial fibrillation using RR intervals

2002· article· en· W2106598802 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS
KeywordsHistogramMathematicsDensity estimationStandard deviationStatisticsAtrial fibrillationPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceMedicineInternal medicineImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work describes a method for automatic detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) based on RR intervals. We define /spl Delta/RR to be the difference between successive RR intervals. The standard density histograms of RR and /spl Delta/RR intervals are determined from data in the MIT-BIH atrial fibrillation/flutter database. The present method estimates the similarity between the standard density histograms and a best density histogram by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test. The algorithm returns significance (p) of difference between given histograms. If the p value is smaller than a value (P/sub c/), the test density histogram is significantly different from the standard density histogram. If the test density histogram is not significantly different from the standard density histogram, we say the data is AF: Using the standard density histogram of /spl Delta/RR with P/sub c/=0.01, the average sensitivity is 93.2% and the average specificity is 96.7%.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207