MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528468257 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2019.04.003

The Effect of Shock Burden on Heart Failure and Mortality

2019· article· en· W2528468257 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

VenueCJC Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityHealth Sciences Centre
FundersNova Scotia Health Authority
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineHeart failureShock (circulatory)Confidence intervalCardiologyProspective cohort studyImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorCohortCohort studyProportional hazards modelPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated an association between appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks and mortality in clinical trials. The effect of shock burden on heart failure and mortality has not been previously studied in a large population-based cohort. METHODS: The cohort was derived using a comprehensive prospective ICD registry in the province of Nova Scotia with a mean follow-up of 4 ± 2.3 years. With the use of time-varying analysis, the relationship among shock burden, mortality, and heart failure hospitalization was determined. RESULTS: 0.03) compared with those receiving no ICD therapy. CONCLUSION: Ventricular arrhythmia treated with appropriate ICD shocks is associated with an increased risk of heart failure hospitalization, whereas recurrent episodes of ventricular arrhythmia requiring shocks are associated with both higher mortality and higher heart failure hospitalization rates.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.316 · 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