MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521370021 · doi:10.4236/jbise.2016.910044

Novel Automated Paced Fractionation Detection Algorithm for Ablating Ventricular Tachycardia

2016· article· en· W2521370021 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Science and Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFractionationVentricular tachycardiaMedicineCatheter ablationAblationCatheterComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringCardiologySurgeryChromatographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Catheter ablation therapy has become a key intervention in treatment of ventriculartachycardia (VT). However, current fractionation mapping methods used to isolate the ablation targets in VT patients are done manually, and are therefore time consuming. They also have limited success rates (50% recurrence rate within 2 years). We present a fully automated fractionation detection algorithm for patients with VT which expands on previously defined fractionation features and which substantially decreases associated study times. Paced electrogram signals were collected from six patients during electrophysiologic study according to a modified paced electrogram fractionation analysis protocol. Data were exported and analyzed offline using custom written software. Electrograms from right ventricular pacing catheter were used as reference. Surface electrograms, along with ventricular geometry and relative catheter locations, were used to identify physiological interference and physiologically irrelevant features. A total of 264 electrograms, collected from a roving catheter, were manually and automatically annotated for fractionation as defined by three features: conduction time (CT), electrogram duration (ED), and number of deflections (ND). Of these, 60 were selected manually to have no discernable features and were successfully discarded by our algorithm; yielding a specificity of 100%. Of the remaining 204, 16 were erroneously discarded by our algorithm; yielding a sensitivity of 92.16%. A comparison between annotations showed correlations of 0.98, 0.97, and 0.94 for AL, ED, and ND respectively.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.248 · 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