MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563349205 · doi:10.1097/wco.0000000000000410

The complexity of atrial fibrillation newly diagnosed after ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack: advances and uncertainties

2016· review· en· W2563349205 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

VenueCurrent Opinion in Neurology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationMedicineStroke (engine)AsymptomaticCardiologyContext (archaeology)Internal medicineIschemic strokeIntensive care medicineIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Atrial fibrillation is being increasingly diagnosed after ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). Patient characteristics, frequency and duration of paroxysms, and the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke associated with atrial fibrillation detected after stroke and TIA (AFDAS) may differ from atrial fibrillation already known before stroke occurrence. We aim to summarize major recent advances in the field, in the context of prior evidence, and to identify areas of uncertainty to be addressed in future research. RECENT FINDINGS: Half of all atrial fibrillations in ischemic stroke and TIA patients are AFDAS, and most of them are asymptomatic. Over 50% of AFDAS paroxysms last less than 30 s. The rapid initiation of cardiac monitoring and its duration are crucial for its timely and effective detection. AFDAS comprises a heterogeneous mix of atrial fibrillation, possibly including cardiogenic and neurogenic types, and a mix of both. Over 25 single markers and at least 10 scores have been proposed as predictors of AFDAS. However, there are considerable inconsistencies across studies. The role of AFDAS burden and its associated risk of stroke recurrence have not yet been investigated. SUMMARY: AFDAS may differ from atrial fibrillation known before stroke in several clinical dimensions, which are important for optimal patient care strategies. Many questions remain unanswered. Neurogenic and cardiogenic AFDAS need to be characterized, as it may be possible to avoid some neurogenic cases by initiating timely preventive treatments. AFDAS burden may differ in ischemic stroke and TIA patients, with distinctive diagnostic and treatment implications. The prognosis of AFDAS and its risk of recurrent stroke are still unknown; therefore, it is uncertain whether AFDAS patients should be treated with oral anticoagulants.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.264 · 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