Bibliographic record
Abstract
This editorial refers to ‘Low rate of asymptomatic cerebral embolism and improved procedural efficiency with the novel pulmonary vein ablation catheter GOLD: results of the PRECISION GOLD trial’ by Yves De Greef et al ., doi:10.1093/europace/euv385. It seems hard to believe that it has been more than 8 years since the first patient was enrolled in the pivotal tailored treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation (TTOP-AF) study which initially evaluated the performance of a multipolar, duty-cycled, phased radiofrequency (PhRF) catheter ablation technology (Ablation Frontiers, Medtronic, Inc.).1 The efficacy of the technology was quite promising showing that nearly 56% of patients experienced substantial improvement in atrial fibrillation (AF) burden at 6 months. In smaller studies, the technology has also consistently shown the ability to achieve outcomes comparable with traditional, single-point RF technology while significantly reducing procedural time.2 In fact, during the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) panel hearing in 2011, there was unanimity that the technology was effective in the treatment of persistent AF. The technology was not granted approval, however, because of safety concerns. In particular, the peri-procedural stroke rate in the TTOP-AF study was 2.9%. There were also two studies in 2011 showing that the incidence of asymptomatic cerebral emboli (ACE) post-ablation was significantly higher with PhRF technology compared with open-irrigated, single-point RF and cryoablation.3–5 Since that time, there has been a …
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".