Potential Role of Life Stress in Unexplained Sudden Cardiac Arrest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The etiology of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) in individuals without known cardiovascular heart disease remains elusive in nearly half of all patients after systematic testing. We investigated the relationship between stressful life events and SCA risk in cases of explained and unexplained SCA (USCA) events. Methods Individuals who previously experienced SCA were enrolled prospectively and divided into a USCA or explained SCA (ESCA) subgroup dependent on whether a diagnosis was ascribed after SCA. Participants completed either the 1997 Recent Life Changes Questionnaire, Student Stress Scale, or Social Re-adjustment Rating Scale for Non-Adults recalling events during the year preceding their SCA, depending on age at SCA presentation; all measure stress in life change units (LCUs). SCA group scores were compared with an age- and sex-matched control group. Results We compared 36 SCA group participants (22 USCA, 14 ESCA, age 47 ± 15 years, age at SCA 40 ± 14 years, 50% male) with 36 control participants (age 47 ± 15 years, 50% male). There was no significant difference in LCU score between the control group and the SCA group (248 ± 181 LCU vs 252 ± 227 LCU; P > .05). The ESCA subgroup had significantly lower mean LCU scores than the USCA subgroup (163 ± 183 LCU vs 308 ± 237 LCU; P = .030). Conclusions Stressful life events, especially those producing chronic stress, might predispose otherwise healthy individuals to lethal arrhythmias. Further investigation into the role of stress in SCA precipitation is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".