MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002695401 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-101236

To play or not to play? sports participation and shared decision-making in athletes with inherited heart rhythm disorders

2020· editorial· en· W3002695401 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher O.Y. Li, Thomas M. Roston, Claire MacEwing, Shubhayan Sanatani

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesRhythmHeart RhythmMedicineSports medicinePhysical therapyPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a leading cause of death in sport. Inherited heart rhythm disorders that cause SCD in young individuals include, but are not limited to, long QT syndrome (LQTS), catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT), Brugada syndrome, arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). The 2005 American College of Cardiology and the European Society of Cardiology consensus statements recommended uniform and mandatory disqualification of athletes with inherited heart rhythm disorders from competitive sports due to the potential risk of fatal arrhythmias precipitated by adrenergic stress.1 2 This broad, universal mandate for exclusion is an antiquated practice from a time where risk was mostly unpredictable and risk reduction strategies poorly defined. The discovery of many evidence-based markers of risk can facilitate a precision medicine approach to exercise prescription in patients with inherited heart rhythm disorders. The risk of recurrent cardiac events is lower than previously thought for primary electrical diseases such as LQTS and CPVT. Young athletes, those aged 21 years or younger, receiving the recommended treatment for LQTS and CPVT (eg, beta blockers and avoidance of QT prolonging medications at a minimum) are not at an increased risk for SCD during competitive sports.3 4 For the other major channelopathy, Brugada syndrome, …

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207