MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131016793 · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-4-5

Is there a clinically significant seasonal component to hospital admissions for atrial fibrillation?

2004· article· en· W2131016793 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ross Upshur, Rahim Moineddin, Eric Crighton, Muhammad Mamdani

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of TorontoUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationMedicineSeasonalityCardiologyPopulationInternal medicinePediatricsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is a common cardiac dysrhythmia, particularly in the elderly. Recent studies have indicated a statistically significant seasonal component to atrial fibrillation hospitalizations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population cohort study using time series analysis to evaluate seasonal patterns of atrial fibrillation hospitalizations for the province of Ontario for the years 1988 to 2001. Five different series methods were used to analyze the data, including spectral analysis, X11, R-Squared, autocorrelation function and monthly aggregation. RESULTS: This study found evidence of weak seasonality, most apparent at aggregate levels including both ages and sexes. There was dramatic increase in hospitalizations for atrial fibrillation over the years studied and an age dependent increase in rates per 100,000. Overall, the magnitude of seasonal difference between peak and trough months is in the order of 1.4 admissions per 100,000 population. The peaks for hospitalizations were predominantly in April, and the troughs in August. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms statistical evidence of seasonality for atrial fibrillation hospitalizations. This effect is small in absolute terms and likely not significant for policy or etiological research purposes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207