Galectin‐3 and risk of atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Galectin-3 is an inflammatory marker that is raised in myocardial fibrosis and inflammation. Recent studies have explored its role in predicting atrial fibrillation (AF) outcomes. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to examine the association between serum concentration of galectin-3 and AF. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database were searched. A total of 280 studies were identified, of which 28 studies involving 10 830 patients were included in our meta-analysis. RESULTS: Galectin-3 is present at higher concentrations in patients with AF than those in sinus rhythm (mean difference [MD] = -0.68 ng/mL, 95% CI: -0.92, -0.44, Z = 5.61, P < .00001). Galectin-3 levels were significantly higher in the persistent AF than in the paroxysmal AF group (MD = -0.94 ng/mL, 95% CI: -1.85, -0.03, Z = 2.04, P = .04). Higher galectin-3 levels were associated with a 45% increase in the odds of developing AF (odds ratio [OR] = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.83, Z = 3.11, P = .002) and risk of AF recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] =1.17, 95% CI: 1.06, 1.29, Z = 3.12, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis found that galectin-3 is significantly higher in patients with persistent AF than in those with paroxysmal AF, and can predict both AF development and recurrence after treatment.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it