MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125839440 · doi:10.2174/1381612054021051

Novel Targets for Cardiac Antiarrhythmic Drug Development

2005· review· en· W2125839440 on OpenAlexaff
J. Christian Hesketh, Daniel Herrera, Stephen Zicha, Stanley Nattel

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Pharmaceutical Design · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProarrhythmiaAfterdepolarizationMedicineCardiologyAnti-Arrhythmia AgentsCardiac arrhythmiaDrugInternal medicineDrug developmentIntensive care medicinePharmacologyAtrial fibrillationRepolarizationElectrophysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac arrhythmias remain a major source of morbidity and mortality in developed countries. Antiarrhythmic drug therapy was traditionally the mainstay of cardiac arrhythmia treatment; however, drug therapy of cardiac arrhythmias has been plagued by incomplete efficacy and by potentially serious adverse reactions, of which the most worrisome has been a potential for malignant proarrhythmia and related effects to increase cardiac mortality. This article reviews the principal arrhythmia mechanisms and their ionic determinants, and discusses potential innovative approaches to new antiarrhythmic drug development, including the consideration of novel ionic targets, potential biophysical approaches and non-channel components involved in composing the arrhythmic substrate. Keywords: sinoatrial node (san), pacemaker, re-excitation, early afterdepolarizations(eads), sarcoplasmic reticulum (sr), automaticity, sodium current, channels, ultra rapid delayed rectifier, antiarrhythmic therapy

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Pharmaceutical DesignSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207