Postablation Atrial Fibrillation Burden and Patient Activity Level: Insights From the DISCERN AF Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Recent evidence shows an association between the level of physical activity and cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in patients with atrial fibrillation ( AF ). We sought to assess the impact of AF daily burden on the activity level of the patient who underwent pulmonary vein isolation. Methods and Results Patients enrolled in the DISCERN AF (Discerning Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Episodes Pre and Post Radiofrequency Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation) study all had insertable cardiac monitors, which provided the daily burden of atrial tachycardia and atrial fibrillation ( AT / AF ) and a corresponding activity level. A total of 44 341 daily AT / AF burden points were collected from 50 patients with an average of 887 observations for every patient, with <5 minutes of AT / AF reported on 82.6% of days. The daily burden of AT / AF after ablation ranged between 0 and 1440 minutes. The minimum and maximum daily activity was 0 and 600 minutes per day, respectively. A significant inverse association was detected between activity levels and AF burden ( P<0.001; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.04). The daily activity starts progressively decreasing after 500 minutes of AF and considerably drops after 1000 minutes. The association between activity level and burden of AT / AF was still statistically significant after adjustment for clinical variables ( P =0.02; 95% confidence interval, -003 to 0.04). Conclusions Daily activity level correlates with daily AT / AF burden in patients who underwent AF ablation. The daily activity started decreasing after a daily burden of 500 minutes of AF and greatly drops after 1000 minutes. Therefore, the amount of AT / AF burden that may impact the activity level seems to be related to hours and not minutes of arrhythmias. Clinical Trial Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 00745706.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".