MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142521396 · doi:10.1183/09031936.05.00093904

Improvement in Cheyne-Stokes respiration following cardiac resynchronisation therapy

2005· article· en· W2142521396 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Y. Gabor

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCheyne–Stokes respirationPolysomnographyHeart failureHyperventilationCardiologyInternal medicineHypocapniaRespiratory systemApnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of standard cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) on the severity of Cheyne-Stokes respiration (CSR) in patients with congestive heart failure was studied. It was hypothesised that CRT, through its known beneficial effects on cardiac function, would stabilise the control of breathing and reduce CSR. Twenty-eight patients who were eligible for CRT and receiving optimised medical treatment for congestive heart failure were referred for overnight polysomnography, including monitoring of thoracic and abdominal movements to identify CSR and obstructive sleep apnoea events. Patients underwent repeat polysomnography after 6 months of CRT to re-evaluate sleep quality and sleep-disordered breathing. Twelve of the 28 patients had significant CSR (43%); 10 patients had a successful implantation and underwent repeat polysomnography a mean+/-SD 27+/-7 weeks after continuous biventricular pacing. Six of the 10 patients experienced a significant decrease in CSR severity following CRT, associated with correction of congestive heart failure-related hyperventilation and hypocapnia. Circulation time, oxygen saturation, frequency of obstructive apnoeas and sleep quality did not change. In conclusion, cardiac resynchronisation therapy is associated with a reduction in Cheyne-Stokes respiration, which may contribute to improved clinical outcome in patients treated with cardiac resynchronisation 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

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

Citations88
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207