MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952557214 · doi:10.1111/anec.12669

New electrocardiographic score for the prediction of atrial fibrillation: The MVP ECG risk score (morphology‐voltage‐P‐wave duration)

2019· article· en· W2952557214 on OpenAlexaff
Bryce Alexander, Julia Milden, Bachar Hazim, Sohaib Haseeb, Antoni Bayés‐Genís, Roberto Elosúa, Manuel Martínez‐Sellés, Cynthia Yeung, Wilma M. Hopman, Antoni Bayés de Luna, Adrián Baranchuk

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationInternal medicineConfidence intervalOdds ratioCardiologyFramingham Risk ScoreElectrocardiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia and has significant morbidity. A score composed of easily measured electrocardiographic variables to identify patients at risk of AF would be of great value in order to stratify patients for increased monitoring and surveillance. The purpose of this study was to develop an electrocardiographic risk score for new-onset AF. METHODS: A total of 676 patients without previous AF undergoing coronary angiography were retrospectively studied. Points were allocated based on P-wave morphology in inferior leads, voltage in lead 1, and P-wave duration (MVP). Patients were divided into three risk groups and followed until development of AF or last available clinical appointment. RESULTS: Mean age was 65 years, and 68% were male. The high- and intermediate-risk groups were more likely to develop AF than the low-risk group (odds ratio [OR] 2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-4.4; p = 0.006 and OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4-3.27; p = 0.009, respectively). The high-risk group had a significantly shorter mean time to development of AF (258 weeks; 95% CI 205-310 weeks) compared to the intermediate- (278 weeks; 95% CI 252-303 weeks) and low-risk groups (322 weeks 95% CI 307-338 weeks), p = 0.005. CONCLUSIONS: A simple risk score composed of easy-to-measure electrocardiographic variables can help to predict new-onset AF. Further validation studies will be needed to assess the ability of this risk score to predict AF in other populations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations87
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Noninvasive ElectrocardiologySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207