MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148343657 · doi:10.2147/vhrm.s6611

Amiodarone for the treatment and prevention of ventricular fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia

2010· review· en· W2148343657 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dorian

Bibliographic record

VenueVascular Health and Risk Management · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmiodaroneMedicineVentricular tachycardiaVentricular fibrillationCardiologyInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)Implantable cardioverter-defibrillatorAtrial fibrillationAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amiodarone has emerged as the leading antiarrhythmic therapy for termination and prevention of ventricular arrhythmia in different clinical settings because of its proven efficacy and safety. In patients with shock refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and hemodynamically destabilizing ventricular arrhythmia, amiodarone is the most effective drug available to assist in resuscitation. Although the superiority of the transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) over amiodarone has been well established in the preventive treatment of patients at high risk of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias, amiodarone (if used with a beta-blocker) is the most effective antiarrhythmic drug to prevent ICD shocks and treat electrical storm. Both the pharmacokinetics and the electrophysiologic profile of amiodarone are complex, and its optimal and safe use requires careful patient surveillance with respect to potential adverse effects.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations107
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVascular Health and Risk ManagementSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207