Administrative data confirm safety of same-day discharge following catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: all good or is there a fly in the ointment?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This editorial refers to ‘The 30-day readmission rate of same-day discharge protocol following catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a propensity score-matched analysis from National Readmission Database’ by Y. Sahashi et al., pp. 755--761. Catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most effective rhythm control strategy, with superiority over antiarrhythmic drugs both as first- and second-line therapy.1,2 While the indication for CA has been strengthened by the current guideline provided by the European Society of Cardiology,3 it remains a resource-intensive procedure. Coupled with the projected increase in AF prevalence,3 the volume of AF ablation procedures is expected to proliferate, which increases demands on the health care system.4 In order to accommodate these demands the electrophysiology community needs to find ways to minimize health care resource utilization while also providing safe and effective CA procedures. Proposed solutions include technical innovations (e.g. high-power/short-duration or...
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".