MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083807864 · doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2020.06.015

Sacubitril/Valsartan and Sudden Cardiac Death According to Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Use and Heart Failure Cause

2020· article· en· W3083807864 on OpenAlexafffund
Luís Eduardo Paim Rohde, Neal A. Chatterjee, Muthiah Vaduganathan, Brian Claggett, Milton Packer, Akshay S. Desai, Michael R. Zile, Jean L. Rouleau, Karl Swedberg, Martin Lefkowitz, Victor Shi, John J.V. McMurray, Scott D. Solomon

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Heart Failure · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteSanofi PasteurBaxter Healthcare CorporationNational Institutes of HealthDalCor PharmaceuticalsNovo NordiskGlaxoSmithKlineConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoBayer FundActavisBoston Scientific CorporationBritish Heart FoundationCytokineticsAbbVieBayerGilead SciencesAstraZenecaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorNovartisMerckAkebia TherapeuticsBristol-Myers SquibbPfizerBoehringer IngelheimAmgenAbbott LaboratoriesKidney Research UKMedtronic
KeywordsMedicineImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorHazard ratioInternal medicineValsartanSacubitril, ValsartanHeart failureCardiologyEjection fractionSudden cardiac deathSacubitrilCardiomyopathyConfidence intervalBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations106
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJACC Heart FailureSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207