MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation and Management of Asymptomatic Bradyarrhythmias

2020· review· en· W3045288556 on OpenAlexaff
Göksel Çinier, Sohaib Haseeb, Giorgos Bazoukis, Cynthia Yeung, Enes Elvin Gül

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.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Cardiology ReviewsSame topicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersFrench-language works237,207