Refining the World Health Organization Definition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conventional definitions of sudden cardiac death (SCD) presume cardiac cause. We studied the World Health Organization-defined SCDs autopsied in the POST SCD study (Postmortem Systematic Investigation of SCD) to determine whether premortem characteristics could identify autopsy-defined sudden arrhythmic death (SAD) among presumed SCDs. METHODS: Between January 2, 2011, and January 4, 2016, we prospectively identified all 615 World Health Organization-defined SCDs (144 witnessed) 18 to 90 years in San Francisco County for medical record review and autopsy via medical examiner surveillance. Autopsy-defined SADs had no extracardiac or acute heart failure cause of death. We used 2 nested sets of premortem predictors-an emergency medical system set and a comprehensive set adding medical record data-to develop Least Absolute Selection and Shrinkage Operator models of SAD among witnessed and unwitnessed cohorts. RESULTS: Of 615 presumed SCDs, 348 (57%) were autopsy-defined SAD. For witnessed cases, the emergency medical system model (area under the receiver operator curve 0.75 [0.67-0.82]) included presenting rhythm of ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation and pulseless electrical activity, while the comprehensive (area under the receiver operator curve 0.78 [0.70-0.84]) added depression. If only ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation witnessed cases (n=48) were classified as SAD, sensitivity was 0.46 (0.36-0.57), and specificity was 0.90 (0.79-0.97). For unwitnessed cases, the emergency medical system model (area under the receiver operator curve 0.68 [0.64-0.73]) included black race, male sex, age, and time since last seen normal, while the comprehensive (area under the receiver operator curve 0.75 [0.71-0.79]) added use of β-blockers, antidepressants, QT-prolonging drugs, opiates, illicit drugs, and dyslipidemia. If only unwitnessed cases <1 hour (n=59) were classified as SAD, sensitivity was 0.18 (0.13-0.22) and specificity was 0.95 (0.90-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Our models identify premortem characteristics that can better specify autopsy-defined SAD among presumed SCDs and suggest the World Health Organization definition can be improved by restricting witnessed SCDs to ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation or nonpulseless electrical activity rhythms and unwitnessed cases to <1 hour since last normal, at the cost of sensitivity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".