MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329713988 · doi:10.15420/ahhj.2009.7.2.130

Electrocardiographic Criteria in Tako-Tsubo Cardiomyopathy—Is There Added Certainty in a Diagnosis Per Exclusionem?

2009· article· en· W2329713988 on OpenAlexaff
Sheneef Sunderji, Vignendra Ariyarajah, Viktor Solodun, Nasir Shaikh, James W. Tam

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Heart Hospital Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTakotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated Phenomena
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface HospitalUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionCardiomyopathyCoronary artery diseaseEmotional stressElectrocardiographyCoronary angiographyTroponinHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tako-Tsubo cardiomypathy (TTC), also known as transient left ventricular apical ballooning syndrome, is a stress-induced cardiomyopathy that predominantly affects post-menopausal, elderly women during emotional or physical stress. Apical left ventricular dysfunction in the absence of significant coronary artery disease is the hallmark of this condition. Because the electrocardiogram (ECG) classically depicts precordial ST-segment elevations and cardiac biomarkers can often be raised, it can be a challenge to differentiate TTC from an acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Indeed, several recent studies have proposed ECG criteria to differentiate TTC from an AMI. We present a case series of consecutive patients in whom we had employed such ECG criteria but were unable to conclusively differentiate TTC from an AMI. In each case, TTC remained a diagnosis per exclusionem, where coronary angiography was necessary to rule out myocardial infarction. We review and discuss the commonly used ECG criteria and highlight the evolutionary ECG changes commonly noted with TTC to help better prepare clinicians when dealing with patients with similar clinical scenarios.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Heart Hospital JournalSame topicTakotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207