MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170421789 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.106.478685

Noninvasive Cardiac Monitoring for Detecting Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation or Flutter After Acute Ischemic Stroke

2007· review· en· W2170421789 on OpenAlex
Joy Liao, Zahira Khalid, Ciaran Scallan, Carlos A. Morillo, Martin O’Donnell

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

VenueStroke · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationAtrial flutterCardiologyInternal medicineStroke (engine)Holter monitorCardiac monitoringImplantable loop recorderElectrocardiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Identifying paroxysmal atrial fibrillation/flutter is an essential part of the etiological workup of patients with ischemic stroke. However, there is controversy in the literature regarding the use of noninvasive cardiac rhythm monitoring with previous reviews reporting a low detection rate with routine monitoring. We performed a systematic review to determine the frequency of occult atrial fibrillation/flutter detected by noninvasive methods of continuous cardiac monitoring after acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. METHODS: Studies were identified from comprehensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and bibliographies of relevant articles. Only English language articles were included. Randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies of consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke that fulfilled predefined criteria were eligible. Two authors conducted searches and abstracted data from eligible studies independently. RESULTS: Sixty studies were deemed potentially eligible. After application of eligibility criteria, 5 studies (736 participants) were included in the analysis. All studies evaluated Holter monitoring; 2 also evaluated event loop recording. In studies that evaluated Holter monitoring (588 participants), new atrial fibrillation/flutter was detected in 4.6% (95% CI: 0% to 12.7%) of consecutive patients with ischemic stroke. Duration of monitoring ranged from 24 to 72 hours. Two studies (140 participants) evaluated event loop recorders after Holter monitoring. New atrial fibrillation/flutter was detected in 5.7% and 7.7% of consecutive patients in these 2 studies. CONCLUSIONS: Screening consecutive patients with ischemic stroke with routine Holter monitoring will identify new atrial fibrillation/flutter in approximately one in 20 patients. Although based on limited data, extended duration of monitoring may improve the detection rate. Further research is required before definitive recommendations can be made.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.293 · 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