MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 15799: Body Mass Index Modulates Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation Burden

2015· article· en· W2922107991 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deanna Dickerman, Brandon Chalazan, Ben B. Shoemaker, Dawood Darbar

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationBody mass indexOverweightInternal medicineCardiologyUnivariate analysisRegimenObesityAblationMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia and is associated with significant morbidity and increased mortality. Approximately fifty percent of patients have AF-related symptoms and require rhythm control therapy with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) or cathether ablation. Obesity is increasingly recognized as an important risk factor for the development of AF. Hypothesis: We assessed the hypothesis that body mass index (BMI) modulates AF symptom severity. Methods: Cross-sectional data was collected from 1429 patients in the Vanderbilt AF Registry. AF burden was assessed using the Toronto Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale (AFSS), a validated survey tool measuring the frequency, duration and severity of AF episodes. BMI was categorized according to WHO guidelines, with BMIs of 18.5 kg/m 2 -25 kg/m 2 considered normal, 25 kg/m 2 -30 kg/m 2 overweight, 30 kg/m 2 -35 kg/m 2 obese and >35 kg/m 2 morbidly obese. Patients were grouped according to their current AF treatment regimen; no treatment (n=195), rate control with AV-nodal blocking agents (n=388), rhythm control with AADs (n=678) and prior AF ablation (n=220). Results: Morbidly obese patients had higher AFSS scores than normal and overweight patients in the rate control (43.57 vs 38.21: P=0.0057), AAD (46.61 vs. 41.08: P=0.00016) and ablation (44.01 vs. 39.02: P=0.047) groups. In univariate linear models, BMI was associated with an increase in the AFSS score in the rate control (0.27, 95% CI 0.05-0.5, P=0.0181), AAD (0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.56, P=2.49 x 10 -5 ) and ablation (0.38, 95% CI 0.03-0.73, P=0.033) groups. The association remained significant in the AAD group after adjusting for age, gender, race, and comorbidities (0.29, 95% CI 0.11-0.49, P=0.0024). Conclusion: In conclusion, our results showed that obesity and increasing BMI were associated with a significant increase in patient-reported measures of AF symptom severity and frequency of AF episodes. The association was most significant in patients on rhythm control therapy with AADs. Further research is needed to determine whether this finding is due to an overlap between subjective obesity-related and AF-related symptoms, or whether obesity may modulate response to rhythm control therapies.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0060.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→