Supraventricular tachycardia in dogs: 65 cases (1990–2007)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective –To characterize the signalment, clinical findings, and prognosis of dogs with supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). Design –Retrospective study. Setting –North Carolina State University Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Animals, Intervention, and Measurements –Case selection included all patients at the veterinary teaching hospital with SVT during years 1990–2007. Medical records from dogs with at least 1 recorded episode of SVT were extracted. The signalment, history, electrocardiographic, radiographic, and echocardiographic findings, therapy, and response to therapy were reviewed and summarized. Follow‐up was conducted to determine the date and cause of death. Kaplan‐Meier survival curves were constructed and analyzed. The relationships between patient characteristics and responses to therapy and prognosis were evaluated. Main Results –Sixty‐five records documented a diagnosis of SVT. Sixty‐two percent were males. Labrador Retrievers and Boxers were overrepresented compared with the general hospital population. Median age at presentation was 9 years (range 0.5–15.5 y). The median heart rate during SVT was 270/minute (range 187–375/min). The most common presenting complaint was syncope (30%), 23% were asymptomatic at the time of diagnosis. Most dogs had structural heart disease (65%). Median survival was 472 days (<1–2007 d). Identification of sustained SVT (>30 s) did not affect survival (P=0.50), nor did the presence of congestive heart failure (P=0.70). Conclusions –The majority of dogs with SVT had structural heart disease or a severe concurrent illness at the time of SVT diagnosis. SVT, though often a persistent and occasionally sustained arrhythmia, does not appear to be a primary factor in mortality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".