MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122546560 · doi:10.1111/eci.13477

Endothelial dysfunction and vascular maladaptation in atrial fibrillation

2021· review· en· W3122546560 on OpenAlexaff
Shuguang Qin, Maxime Boidin, Benjamin J. R. Buckley, Gregory Y.H. Lip, Dick H. J. Thijssen

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Clinical Investigation · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationMedicineMaladaptationIntensive care medicineCardiologyEndothelial dysfunctionInternal medicinePopulationVascular disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia and is associated with worsened morbidity and mortality. The prevalence of AF is estimated to increase with an ageing population resulting in an ever-increasing burden on the healthcare system. Despite improvements in AF treatment, several questions remain unanswered in relation to the development and progression of AF. In this review, we discuss the evidence supporting the presence of vascular dysfunction in the development of AF, but also as a final common pathway explaining why AF constitutes a markedly increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Specifically, we summarise the work performed in humans related to the impact of AF on vascular structure and function, and whether measures of vascular function predict AF progression and the development of cardiovascular events. Subsequently, we discuss the potential mechanisms linking AF to the development of vascular dysfunction. Finally, we propose future perspectives of vascular health and AF, advocating a strong focus on regular exercise training as a safe and effective strategy to improve vascular function and, hence, reduce the risk for development and progression of AF and its associated risk for cardiovascular events.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207