MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2299832056 · doi:10.1136/openhrt-2014-000226

A new electrode placement method for obtaining 12-lead ECGs

2015· article· en· W2299832056 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Heart · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsLead (geology)ElectrodeCardiologyComputer scienceMaterials scienceInternal medicineBiomedical engineeringMedicineChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Worldwide, more than 50 million ECGs are carried out annually. Studies show that the standard wrist-ankle placement method may produce poor quality ECGs. Factors including limb movement, tremor, anxiety, cold extremities cause artefacts (distortions of the baseline and ECG waveforms). A problem exists. Physicians face a challenge interpreting poor quality ECGs. Diagnostic delays occur. Patients are subjected to recalls; compassion initiated this study. Torso (modified) leads are favoured as they provide rapid acquisition of better quality ECGs, but cause erroneous electrocardiography. Investigators have not attempted to correct these errors. This study analyses the errors and aims to rectify them. METHODS: Our pilot and other studies indicated that torso electrodes placed close to the heart cause an increase in R wave amplitude >3 mm in inferior leads that results in disappearance of inferior infarcts; a decrease >3 mm in 1 and aVL may cause false lateral infarcts. We hypothesised that finding electrode placements that do not cause alterations in R wave amplitude should correct these problems. Several electrode placements were assessed to obtain ECGs identical with the standard, but with better quality. A total of 1112 patients received standard and new electrode placement recordings. ECG parameters were assessed. A blinded interpreter assisted. RESULTS: Electrodes positioned on the mid-arm and lower abdomen revealed ECGs identical with the standard without artefacts or loss of inferior or appearance of lateral infarcts. CONCLUSIONS: This study proved that the new method is faultless and provides better quality ECGs, no recalls and without risk for misinterpretations. Not having to remove leg garments is convenient and allows more rapid acquisition of ECGs. The forearms are freed for, intravenous, radial access, and ECGs needed during procedures. The findings have implications worldwide for patients, clinicians and technicians, and generate the need to study the method in emergency settings.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.313 · 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