MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140485936 · doi:10.1161/circep.109.849638

The Relationship Between Daily Atrial Tachyarrhythmia Burden From Implantable Device Diagnostics and Stroke Risk

2009· article· en· W2140485936 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationHazard ratioStroke (engine)Internal medicineCardiologyProportional hazards modelAntithromboticObservational studyAtrial tachycardiaRisk factorHeart failureDiabetes mellitusProspective cohort studyConfidence intervalCatheter ablation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It is unknown if brief episodes of device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) increase thromboembolic event (TE) risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: TRENDS was a prospective, observational study enrolling patients with > or = 1 stroke risk factor (heart failure, hypertension, age > or = 65 years, diabetes, or prior TE) receiving pacemakers or defibrillators that monitor atrial tachycardia (AT)/AF burden (defined as the longest total AT/AF duration on any given day during the prior 30-day period). This time-varying exposure was updated daily during follow-up and related to TE risk. Annualized TE rates were determined according to AT/AF burden subsets: zero, low (<5.5 hours [median duration of subsets with nonzero burden]), and high (> or = 5.5 hours). A multivariate Cox model provided hazard ratios including terms for stroke risk factors and time-varying AT/AF burden and antithrombotic therapy. Patients (n=2486) had at least 30 days of device data for analysis. During a mean follow-up of 1.4 years, annualized TE risk (including transient ischemic attacks) was 1.1% for zero, 1.1% for low, and 2.4% for high burden subsets of 30-day windows. Compared with zero burden, adjusted hazard ratios (95% CIs) in the low and high burden subsets were 0.98 (0.34 to 2.82, P=0.97) and 2.20 (0.96 to 5.05, P=0.06), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The TE rate was low compared with patients with traditional AF with similar risk profiles. The data suggest that TE risk is a quantitative function of AT/AF burden. AT/AF burden > or = 5.5 hours on any of 30 prior days appeared to double TE risk. Additional studies are needed to more precisely investigate the relationship between stroke risk and AT/AF burden.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.267 · 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