Integrated rate-dependent and dual pathway AV nodal functions: principles and assessment framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The atrioventricular (AV) node conducts slowly and has a long refractory period. These features sustain the filtering of atrial impulses and hence are often modulated to optimize ventricular rate during supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. The AV node is also the site of a clinically common reentrant arrhythmia. Its function is assessed for a variety of purposes from its responses to a premature protocol (S1S2, test beats introduced at different cycle lengths) repeatedly performed at different basic rates and/or to an incremental pacing protocol (increasingly faster rates). Puzzlingly, resulting data and interpretation differ with protocols as well as with chosen recovery and refractory indexes, and are further complicated by the presence of built-in fast and slow pathways. This problem applies to endocavitary investigations of arrhythmias as well as to many experimental functional studies. This review supports an integrated framework of rate-dependent and dual pathway AV nodal function that can account for these puzzling characteristics. The framework was established from AV nodal responses to S1S2S3 protocols that, compared with standard S1S2 protocols, allow for an orderly quantitative dissociation of the different factors involved in changes in AV nodal conduction and refractory indexes under rate-dependent and dual pathway function. Although largely based on data from experimental studies, the proposed framework may well apply to the human AV node. In conclusion, the rate-dependent and dual pathway properties of the AV node can be integrated within a common functional framework the contribution of which to individual responses can be quantitatively determined with properly designed protocols and analytic tools.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".