Rationale and Design of ATHENA: <b>A</b> Placebo‐Controlled, Double‐Blind, Parallel Arm <b>T</b>rial to Assess the Efficacy of Dronedarone 400 mg Bid for the Prevention of Cardiovascular <b>H</b>ospitalization or Death from Any Cause in Pati<b>EN</b>ts with <b>A</b>trial Fibrillation/Atrial Flutter
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly encountered clinical arrhythmia, predominantly affecting elderly patients. There is a continued need for new antiarrhythmic drugs to treat the ever-increasing number of patients with this arrhythmia. Dronedarone is a new antiarrhythmic compound currently being developed for treatment of AF. METHODS: The ATHENA trial (A placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel arm Trial to assess the efficacy of dronedarone 400 mg bid for the prevention of cardiovascular Hospitalization or death from any cause in patiENts with Atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter) is the largest single antiarrhythmic drug trial ever conducted. More than 4,600 patients with a history of AF or atrial flutter (AFL) have been randomized to receive dronedarone 400 mg bid or matching placebo. The primary study endpoint is time to first cardiovascular hospitalization or death from any cause. The study has completed patient enrollment in December 2006 and is expected to end follow-up 1 year later. CONCLUSION: ATHENA will be the largest efficacy and safety trial of dronedarone, a multichannel blocker compound with properties from class I, II, III, and IV antiarrhythmic drugs developed to treat patients with AF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it