MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021486524 · doi:10.1152/physrev.00036.2019

Cardiac Mechano-Electric Coupling: Acute Effects of Mechanical Stimulation on Heart Rate and Rhythm

2020· review· en· W3021486524 on OpenAlexafffund
T. Alexander Quinn, Peter Köhl

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Reviews · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsRhythmStimulationCoupling (piping)Heart rateHeart RhythmElectric stimulationMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineNeuroscienceMaterials scienceBiologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The heart is vital for biological function in almost all chordates, including humans. It beats continually throughout our life, supplying the body with oxygen and nutrients while removing waste products. If it stops, so does life. The heartbeat involves precise coordination of the activity of billions of individual cells, as well as their swift and well-coordinated adaption to changes in physiological demand. Much of the vital control of cardiac function occurs at the level of individual cardiac muscle cells, including acute beat-by-beat feedback from the local mechanical environment to electrical activity (as opposed to longer term changes in gene expression and functional or structural remodeling). This process is known as mechano-electric coupling (MEC). In the current review, we present evidence for, and implications of, MEC in health and disease in human; summarize our understanding of MEC effects gained from whole animal, organ, tissue, and cell studies; identify potential molecular mediators of MEC responses; and demonstrate the power of computational modeling in developing a more comprehensive understanding of ‟what makes the heart tick.ˮ.

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)0.000
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations178
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ReviewsSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207