Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS): State of the science and clinical care from a 2019 National Institutes of Health Expert Consensus Meeting - Part 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) is a chronic and often disabling disorder characterized by orthostatic intolerance with excessive heart rate increase without hypotension during upright posture. Patients often experience a constellation of other typical symptoms including fatigue, exercise intolerance and gastrointestinal distress. A typical patient with POTS is a female of child-bearing age, who often first displays symptoms in adolescence. The onset of POTS may be precipitated by immunological stressors such as a viral infection. A variety of pathophysiologies are involved in the abnormal postural tachycardia response; however, the pathophysiology of the syndrome is incompletely understood and undoubtedly multifaceted. Clinicians and researchers focused on POTS convened at the National Institutes of Health in July 2019 to discuss the current state of understanding of the pathophysiology of POTS and to identify priorities for POTS research. This article, the first of two articles summarizing the information discussed at this meeting, summarizes the current understanding of this disorder and best practices for clinical care. The evaluation of a patient with suspected POTS should seek to establish the diagnosis, identify co-morbid conditions, and exclude conditions that could cause or mimic the syndrome. Once diagnosed, management typically begins with patient education and non-pharmacologic treatment options. Various medications are often used to address specific symptoms, but there are currently no FDA-approved medications for the treatment of POTS, and evidence for many of the medications used to treat POTS is not robust.
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 | 0.024 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".