MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613252700 · doi:10.1111/anec.12447

2017 ISHNE-HRS expert consensus statement on ambulatory ECG and external cardiac monitoring/telemetry

2017· article· en· W2613252700 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan S. Steinberg, Niraj Varma, Iwona Cygankiewicz, Peter F. Aziz, Paweł Balsam, Adrián Baranchuk, Daniel J. Cantillon, Polychronis Dilaveris, Sérgio Dubner, Nabil El‐Sherif, Jarosław Król, Małgorzata Kurpesa, Maria Teresa La Rovere, S. Suave Lobodziński, Suneet Mittal, Brian Olshansky, Ewa Piotrowicz, Leslie A. Saxon, Peter H. Stone, Larisa G. Tereshchenko, Gioia Turitto, Neil J. Wimmer, Richard L. Verrier, Wojciech Zaręba, Ryszard Piotrowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTelemetryAmbulatoryClinical PracticeAmbulatory ECGIntensive care medicineCardiologyInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ambulatory ECG (AECG) is very commonly employed in a variety of clinical contexts to detect cardiac arrhythmias and/or arrhythmia patterns which are not readily obtained from the standard ECG. Accurate and timely characterization of arrhythmias is crucial to direct therapies that can have an important impact on diagnosis, prognosis or patient symptom status. The rhythm information derived from the large variety of AECG recording systems can often lead to appropriate and patient-specific medical and interventional management. The details in this document provide background and framework from which to apply AECG techniques in clinical practice, as well as clinical research.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.015

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations109
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Noninvasive ElectrocardiologySame topicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersFrench-language works237,207