MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 21148: Stress-Induced Cardiac Repolarization Changes Are Associated With Mental Stress-Induced Mycoardial Ischemia

2017· article· en· W2912079816 on OpenAlexaff
Amit Shah, Pratik Pimple, Zakaria Almuwaqqat, Matt Amin, Mhd Alaa Hammoud, Muhammad Hammadah, Mohamad Mazen Gafeer, Ayman Alkhoder, Naser Abdelhadi, Kobina Wilmot, Oleksiy Levantsevych, Ibhar Al Mheid, Ernest Garcia, Michael Kutner, Paolo Raggi, Rachel Lampert, Nino Isakadze, Elsayed Z. Soliman, Arshed A. Quyyumi, Viola Vaccarino

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyRepolarizationCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineStressorStress testing (software)Benign early repolarizationQRS complexIschemiaMyocardial infarctionST segmentPsychiatryElectrophysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Mental Stress-Induced Myocardial Ischemia (MSIMI) can occur in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) during acute mental stress challenge and is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Adverse dynamic changes in repolarization with stress may also be particularly important when assessing risk of MSIMI. Hypothesis: In subjects with CAD, dynamic ECG repolarization changes during stress and recovery are associated with MSIMI. Methods: We studied 419 individuals with CAD who underwent mental stress challenge via a standardized speech stressor. Digital 12-lead ECGs were collected at baseline during resting , 1 minute after speech started, immediately after speech, and during recovery (5 minutes after speech ended). Repolarization metrics, including QRS-T angle, T-axis, ST depression, and T wave area were quantified in all 12 leads. Heart rate was also included. Subjects with baseline artifact were excluded. Changes amongst baseline, stress, and recovery were analyzed. Forward selection with alpha=0.01 was used to help guide the final model. MSIMI was assessed via Tc99m myocardial perfusion imaging (read by experienced clinicians). Results: The mean (SD) age was 56 (10), 38% were women, and 17% had MSIMI. The most significant predictors of MSIMI, based on the multivariate model, are summarized in the table. The C-statistic was 0.73, but reduced to 0.71 after leave-one-out cross validation. Goodness of fit was adequate. No significant race or gender differences were noted. Conclusion: Baseline and dynamic ECG repolarization changes in recovery (but not peak stress) contribute to MSIMI classification, and may be useful for risk stratification of arrhythmia risk due to emotional triggers. While the mechanisms regarding the relationship of MSIMI and ECG metrics during recovery are unknown, they could be due to hysteresis phenomena and/or known autonomic changes during recovery from stress.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0070.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→