MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2207644898 · doi:10.4172/2368-0512.1000028

Refractory atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia: A rare manifestation of acute massive pulmonary embolism

2015· article· en· W2207644898 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jignesh M. Patel, Jinu John

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent research. Cardiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyAtrial flutterInternal medicineSupraventricular tachycardiaTachycardiaAtrial fibrillationCardiogenic shockPulmonary embolismElectrocardiographyAcute pericarditisAtrial tachycardiaCatheter ablationMyocardial infarctionPericarditis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a wide array of manifestations ranging from mild dyspnea to fatal cardiogenic shock, acute pulmonary embolism (PE) remains an enigmatic clinical entity.Vivid electrocardiography (ECG) patterns portrayed in different clinical instances of acute PE have always remained an interesting, yet debatable subject since the classic S1Q3T3 pattern on ECG secondary to PE was first described in 1935.Atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter and atrial tachycardia are commonly described supraventricular tachycardias in association with PE; however, there is scant description of PE in the literature presenting as atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia (AVNRT).The present report describes the clinical course of an elderly woman presenting with refractory typical AVNRT who was subsequently found to have bilateral multilobar acute PE.To the authors' knowledge, the present report is the first to describe a case involving acute PE presenting as hemodynamically unstable AVNRT requiring cardioversion.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent research. CardiologySame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207