MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3150955679 · doi:10.47487/apcyccv.v2i1.126

Síndrome de Bayés, accidente cerebrovascular y demencia

2021· review· en· W3150955679 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo Iomini, Manuel Martínez‐Sellés, Roberto Elosúa, Antoni Bayés de Luna, Adrián Baranchuk

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivos Peruanos de Cardiología y Cirugía Cardiovascular · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationStroke (engine)DementiaBayIncidence (geometry)Intervention (counseling)Internal medicineCardiologyDiseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bayés's syndrome is a clinical entity based on the association between advanced interatrial block and the development of supraventricular tachyarrhythmia, being atrial fibrillation (AF) the most frequent. This association was discovered by Prof. Antoni Bayés de Luna in the '80s. Further studies by other groups found a strong relationship between Bayés's syndrome and thromboembolic phenomena, being stroke the most serious. Moreover, patients with this syndrome have an increased incidence of cognitive impairment and dementia. This observation triggered the question about whether the use of anticoagulation therapy prior to the documentation of AF could prevent A-IAB associated thromboembolic events. There are ongoing studies in different phases of development aiming to compare the efficacy of anticoagulation in patients with A-IAB with no prior documentation of AF. The outcomes of these studies will allow determining the efficacy of this early therapeutic intervention, and help deciding the role of anticoagulation in patients with A-IAB and no demonstrated AF.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivos Peruanos de Cardiología y Cirugía CardiovascularSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207