Electrocardiographic evaluation of the ventricular arrhythmia risk in patients with schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine electrocardiographic ventricular arrhythmia predictors in patients with schizophrenia by comparing with healthy controls. Methods: The study included 100 patients with schizophrenia and 100 healthy controls. Electrocardiography (ECG) was performed on all participants in resting position. T-wave peak to end (Tp-e), QT ranges, P-wave dispersion (Pd), and R-R range were measured. Then, the Schizophrenia Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) were applied to the schizophrenia group. Results: < .001 for all intervals). Discussion: Based on our results, it is possible to speculate that patients with schizophrenia are at a risk of developing cardiac arrhythmia and cardiac dysfunction if they do not receive treatment. For this reason, clinicians should pay attention to cardiac transmission problems when organizing the treatment of patients. Further studies should be conducted to determine cardiac problems in patients with schizophrenia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".