MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation and Management of Asymptomatic Bradyarrhythmias

2020· review· en· W3045288556 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Cardiology Reviews · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsymptomaticIntensive care medicineCardiac pacingBradycardiaRisk stratificationCardiologyInternal medicinePediatricsHeart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asymptomatic bradyarrhythmias involving sinus node dysfunction and atrioventicular blocks are frequently noted in clinical practice. Its prevalence is expected to rise as devices that are developed for monitoring cardiac rhythm for longer duration become more widely available. Episodes of bradyarrhythmia that are asymptomatic are considered to have a benign course compared with those that cause symptoms and do not necessitate further treatment. However, in certain cases, they can be a harbinger of future symptoms or cardiac manifestations of systemic diseases. The evaluation and risk stratification of individuals presenting with asymptomatic bradyarrhythmias is important not only for preventing implantation of unnecessary permanent pacing devices but also for reducing significant morbidity by implementing proper treatment as required. In this article, we will review the current evidence on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, evaluation and management of patients with asymptomatic bradyarrhythmias.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.283 · 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