MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122442437 · doi:10.1161/circresaha.116.304493

Sudden Cardiac Death Risk Stratification

2015· review· en· W2122442437 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc W. Deyell, Andrew D. Krahn, Jeffrey J. Goldberger

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Research · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineAsystoleCardiologyVentricular fibrillationInternal medicinePulseless electrical activitySudden cardiac deathVentricular tachycardiaCoronary artery diseaseRisk stratificationMyocardial infarctionSudden cardiac arrestAnesthesiaCardiopulmonary resuscitationResuscitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arrhythmic sudden cardiac death (SCD) may be caused by ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation or pulseless electric activity/asystole. Effective risk stratification to identify patients at risk of arrhythmic SCD is essential for targeting our healthcare and research resources to tackle this important public health issue. Although our understanding of SCD because of pulseless electric activity/asystole is growing, the overwhelming majority of research in risk stratification has focused on SCD-ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation. This review focuses on existing and novel risk stratification tools for SCD-ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation. For patients with left ventricular dysfunction or myocardial infarction, advances in imaging, measures of cardiac autonomic function, and measures of repolarization have shown considerable promise in refining risk. Yet the majority of SCD-ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation occurs in patients without known cardiac disease. Biomarkers and novel imaging techniques may provide further risk stratification in the general population beyond traditional risk stratification for coronary artery disease alone. Despite these advances, significant challenges in risk stratification remain that must be overcome before a meaningful impact on SCD can be realized.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.238
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations122
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation ResearchSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207