Bibliographic record
Abstract
HeartRhythm Case Reports is completing its second year in publication. The journal’s mission is to publish select case reports in alignment with the Heart Rhythm Society mission, which is to improve the care of patients by advancing research, education, and optimal health care policies and standards in the realm of heart rhythm disorders. The journal enjoys the support and influence of an international editorial board and section editors. Each manuscript received is reviewed by the editor-in-chief and, typically, a section editor who has specific expertise in the key aspects of the case report. If a manuscript is selected for further consideration, the majority are reviewed by at least 2 peer reviewers. We have employed a rigorous review process with the goal of publishing high-quality case reports that will be a worldwide educational resource for those interested in the treatment of heart rhythm disorders. The editorial team remains committed to scientific integrity, the peer review process, and a strict selection process to allow our manuscripts to be indexed through PubMed. We have submitted our journal for indexing to PubMed. The process involves multiple steps of review and we remain very optimistic at this point that we will be selected for indexing. The journal has been fortunate to receive a rich contribution of case reports from our pediatric colleagues. In order to more accurately evaluate these case reports, Elizabeth Stephenson, MD, MSc, from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada joined our staff as a section editor. Her expertise has been invaluable as we have considered a broad range of pediatric reports that often highlight cardiac channelopathies, novel genetic mutations, complex anatomies, and unique ablation challenges. Overall, the state of the journal remains very strong and the volume of submissions continues to be a favorable surprise. We greatly appreciate the support of the many authors that have contributed to the journal. We also appreciate the readers that have shared the articles and findings abundantly across multiple social media channels. In 2015 we received 354 submissions. As of September 2016, we have received 232. We are averaging 30 submissions to the journal per month. In order to more timely publish the accepted manuscripts in 2017, the journal will publish a monthly issue rather than the current bimonthly format. The journal is indebted to the 528 experts from 29 countries that have volunteered their time to provide timely reviews. In 2016, the top 5 submitting countries were the United States, Japan, Canada, Germany, and Italy. During this year we accepted manuscripts from many countries for the first time, including Bulgaria, Croatia, Hong Kong, Iran, Malaysia, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, and Tunisia. Under the supervision of Dr Dan Morin, the journal website was improved to be more illustrative, user friendly, and up-to-date with the latest educational cases. We have many more updates planned for 2017 that we hope will improve the user experience of the website and online journal. I have greatly enjoyed the opportunity to serve as editor-in-chief of HeartRhythm Case Reports. It is a pleasure of mine to work alongside Dr Peng-Sheng Chen, the editor of HeartRhythm, and the editorial staff of both journals as we serve the Heart Rhythm Society and its members. It is my hope that you will continue to contribute to this journal and use it as a tool of education for all those interested in heart rhythm disorders.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".