MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293354473 · doi:10.1586/14779072.2016.1165092

Ivabradine for the treatment of chronic heart failure

2016· review· en· W2293354473 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Henri, Eileen O’Meara, Simon de Denus, Lynn Elzir, Jean‐Claude Tardif

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart rate and cardiovascular health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIvabradineMedicineHeart failureCardiologyEjection fractionHeart rateInternal medicineSinus rhythmContext (archaeology)Beta blockerAtrial fibrillationBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have underlined the beneficial effects of a lower heart rate on mortality in patients with chronic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. In clinical practice, achieving a heart rate ≤70 bpm with beta-blockers is not always possible. In this context, the more recent guidelines added ivabradine to the management of those patients if heart rate remains ≥70 bpm in sinus rhythm and symptoms persist despite treatment with an evidence-based or maximum tolerated dose of a beta-blocker, an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin-receptor blocker, and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. Ivabradine is a well-tolerated, safe and effective treatment option with the objective to improve prognosis, left ventricular structure and function, exercise tolerance and quality of life. Accordingly, the following article will evaluate the benefits of a combination of the currently recommended pharmacological therapy in chronic heart failure with the selective heart rate reducing agent ivabradine.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.025
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicHeart rate and cardiovascular healthFrench-language works237,207