The prognostic role of interatrial block among COVID‐19 patients hospitalized in medicine wards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Some abnormal electrocardiographic findings were independently associated with increased mortality in patients admitted for COVID-19; however, no studies have focussed on the prognosis impact of the interatrial block (IAB) in this clinical setting. The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence and clinical implications of IAB, both partial and advanced, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS: We retrospectively evaluated 300 consecutive COVID-19 patients (63.22 ± 15.16 years; 70% males) admitted to eight Italian Hospitals from February 2020 to April 2020 who underwent twelve lead electrocardiographic recording at admission. The study population has been dichotomized into two groups according to the evidence of IAB at admission, both partial and advanced. The differences in terms of ARDS in need of intubation, in-hospital mortality and thromboembolic events (a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke and transient ischaemic attack) have been evaluated. RESULTS: The presence of IAB was noticed in 64 patients (21%). In the adjusted logistic regression model, the partial interatrial block was found to be an independent predictor of ARDS in need of intubation (HR: 1.92; p: .04) and in-hospital mortality (HR: 2.65; p: .02); moreover, the advanced interatrial block was an independent predictor of thrombotic events (HR: 7.14; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Among COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical wards, the presence of interatrial block is more frequent than in the general population and it might be useful as an early predictor for increased risk of incident thrombotic events, ARDS in need of intubation and in-hospital mortality.
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 | 0.020 | 0.354 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".