MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809584583 · doi:10.21037/jtd.2018.06.53

Interatrial block predicts atrial fibrillation in patients with carotid and coronary artery disease

2018· article· en· W2809584583 on OpenAlexafffund
Bryce Alexander, Adrián Baranchuk, Sohaib Haseeb, Henri van Rooy, Adrian Kuchtaruk, Wilma M. Hopman, Göksel Çinier, Marie‐France Hétu, Terry Y. Li, Amer M. Johri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thoracic Disease · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseCarotid ultrasonographyPopulationCommon carotid arteryHazard ratioCarotid arteriesConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Interatrial block (IAB) has been previously shown to predict atrial fibrillation (AF) in cardiac populations. This study sought to evaluate the relationship between IAB and new-onset AF in a population of patients undergoing clinically indicated coronary angiography who received carotid ultrasonography. Methods: A population of 355 subjects undergoing coronary angiography and carotid ultrasound were retrospectively studied. Common carotid artery (CCA) far-wall intima-media thickness (CIMT), and total carotid plaque area were measured. Coronary artery disease was measured by angiography and IAB by electrocardiograph (ECG). Results: The mean population age was 64.4 years, 70.4% male, mean BMI 29.9 kg/m2. IAB was a predictor of new-onset AF (OR =2.40, 95% CI: 1.33–4.29; P=0.003). There was a significant difference in AF free survival time between patients with IAB and without IAB via Cox proportional hazard analysis [52.9 months (95% CI: 47.1–58.7 months) vs. 62.6 months (95% CI: 58.8–66.5 months); P=0.006]. Patients with IAB had a significantly greater CIMT (0.883±0.193 vs. 0.829±0.192 mm; P=0.013) and a higher prevalence of significant (>70%) right coronary artery lesions than patients without (45.8% vs. 34.4%; P=0.026). Significant predictors of IAB on multivariate analysis were BMI ≥30 kg/m2 (OR =3.14, 95% CI: 1.14–6.71, P=0.003), male sex (OR =1.78, 95% CI: 1.05–3.03, P=0.034), increased mean CIMT (per 0.1 mm increase) (OR =1.75, 95% CI: 1.00–3.07, P=0.050) and increased age (per 10-year increase) (OR =1.46, 95% CI: 1.14–1.88, P=0.003). Conclusions: IAB is a predictor of new-onset AF in patients with carotid and coronary artery disease. Both carotid and coronary artery disease are associated with a higher prevalence of IAB.

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 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thoracic DiseaseSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207