MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225699182 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehac180

A new prediction model for ventricular arrhythmias in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy

2022· article· en· W4225699182 on OpenAlexafffund
Julia Cadrin‐Tourigny, Laurens P. Bosman, Anna Nozza, Weijia Wang, Rafik Tadros, Aditya Bhonsale, Mimount Bourfiss, Annik Fortier, Øyvind Lie, Ardan M. Saguner, Anneli Svensson, Antoine Andorin, Crystal Tichnell, Brittney Murray, Katja Zeppenfeld, Maarten P. van den Berg, Folkert W. Asselbergs, Arthur A.M. Wilde, Andrew D. Krahn, Mario Talajic, Léna Rivard, Stephen P. Chelko, Stefan L. Zimmerman, Ihab R. Kamel, Jane E. Crosson, Daniel P. Judge, Sing‐Chien Yap, Jeroen F. van der Heijden, Harikrishna Tandri, Jan D.H. Jongbloed, M. Guertin, J. Peter van Tintelen, Pyotr G. Platonov, Fırat Duru, Kristina H. Haugaa, Paul Khairy, Richard N.W. Hauer, Hugh Calkins, Anneline S.J.M. te Riele, Cynthia A. James

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersNetherlands Heart InstitutePeter French Memorial FoundationInstitut de Cardiologie de MontréalFondation Institut de Cardiologie de MontréalBaugarten StiftungSchweizerische HerzstiftungJohns Hopkins UniversityUniversitair Medisch Centrum UtrechtNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekNational Science FoundationHartstichtingSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungFondation LeducqEuropean CommissionNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchEuropean Research Area Network on Cardiovascular DiseasesHeart Rhythm Society
KeywordsMedicineImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorCardiologyInternal medicineInterquartile rangeVentricular tachycardiaArrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasiaSudden cardiac deathEjection fractionVentricular fibrillationConfidence intervalCardiomyopathyHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is characterized by ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and sudden cardiac death (SCD). We aimed to develop a model for individualized prediction of incident VA/SCD in ARVC patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty-eight patients with a definite diagnosis and no history of sustained VAs/SCD at baseline, aged 38.2 ± 15.5 years, 44.7% male, were enrolled from five registries in North America and Europe. Over 4.83 (interquartile range 2.44-9.33) years of follow-up, 146 (27.7%) experienced sustained VA, defined as SCD, aborted SCD, sustained ventricular tachycardia, or appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy. A prediction model estimating annual VA risk was developed using Cox regression with internal validation. Eight potential predictors were pre-specified: age, sex, cardiac syncope in the prior 6 months, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia, number of premature ventricular complexes in 24 h, number of leads with T-wave inversion, and right and left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs). All except LVEF were retained in the final model. The model accurately distinguished patients with and without events, with an optimism-corrected C-index of 0.77 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.81] and minimal over-optimism [calibration slope of 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.95)]. By decision curve analysis, the clinical benefit of the model was superior to a current consensus-based ICD placement algorithm with a 20.3% reduction of ICD placements with the same proportion of protected patients (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Using the largest cohort of patients with ARVC and no prior VA, a prediction model using readily available clinical parameters was devised to estimate VA risk and guide decisions regarding primary prevention ICDs (www.arvcrisk.com).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations128
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207