MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947158333 · doi:10.1111/pace.13734

An integrated overview of AV node physiology

2019· review· en· W2947158333 on OpenAlexaff
Jacques Billette, Rafik Tadros

Bibliographic record

VenuePacing and Clinical Electrophysiology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The atrioventricular (AV) node generates half of the AV delay needed for blood pumping and filters atrial impulses that could otherwise induce life‐threatening ventricular arrhythmias. It is also a pacemaker and a key target in the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias. The special roles of the AV node primarily arise from its slow conduction, long refractory period, and cellular automaticity. However, efforts to establish the dynamics of these properties and their interaction led to many controversies. In fact, the AV node's behavior is so complex that it seems to escape broadly applicable rules. This review summarizes progresses made in resolving these issues and in integrating the multiple roles of the AV node within a common functional model. Presented evidence shows that the rate‐dependent conduction and refractory properties of the AV node can be reliably characterized and reconciled from nodal responses to S1S2S3 protocols. It also supports the concept that dual pathways constitute a feature of the normal AV node and account for its overall conduction and refractory properties. In this model, the posterior extension and compact node provide the core of the slow and fast pathway, respectively. The transitional tissues and lower nodal bundle provide a common proximal and distal pathway, respectively. These pathways would also support bidirectional conduction. The dual pathway involvement can also be extended to widely variable AV nodal responses, such as Wenckebach cycles, hysteresis, and ventricular response to atrial fibrillation. In brief, the intricate AV nodal behavior may obey a limited set of accessible and definable rules.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.351 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacing and Clinical ElectrophysiologySame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207