Validation of a New Simple Scale to Measure Symptoms in Atrial Fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is commonly associated with impaired quality of life. There is no simple validated scale to quantify the functional illness burden of AF. The Canadian Cardiovascular Society Severity in Atrial Fibrillation (CCS-SAF) scale is a bedside scale that ranges from class 0 to 4, from no effect on functional quality of life to a severe effect on life quality. This study was performed to validate the scale. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 484 patients with documented AF (62.2+/-12.5 years of age, 67% men; 62% paroxysmal and 38% persistent/permanent), the SAF class was assessed and 2 validated quality-of-life questionnaires were administered: the SF-36 generic scale and the disease-specific AFSS (University of Toronto Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale). There is a significant linear graded correlation between the SAF class and measures of symptom severity, physical and emotional components of quality of life, general well-being, and health care consumption related to AF. Patients with SAF class 0 had age- and sex-standardized SF-36 scores of 0.15+/-0.16 and -0.04+/-0.31 (SD units), that is, units away from the mean population score for the mental and physical summary scores, respectively. For each unit increase in SAF class, there is a 0.36 and 0.40 SD unit decrease in the SF-36 score for the physical and mental components. As the SAF class increases from 0 to 4, the symptom severity score (range, 0 to 35) increases from 4.2+/-5.0 to 18.4+/-7.8 (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The CCS-SAF scale is a simple semiquantitative scale that closely approximates patient-reported subjective measures of quality of life in AF and may be practical for clinical use.
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 | 0.009 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".