MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231527925 · doi:10.1093/europace/euy046

European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)/Heart Rhythm Society (HRS)/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS)/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS) expert consensus on arrhythmias and cognitive function: what is the best practice?

2018· article· en· W4231527925 on OpenAlexaff
Nikolaos Dagres, Tze‐Fan Chao, Guilherme Fenelon, Luis Aguinaga, Daniel Benhayon, Emelia J. Benjamin, T. Jared Bunch, Lin Y. Chen, Shih‐Ann Chen, Francisco Darrieux, Angelo de Paola, Laurent Fauchier, Andreas Goette, Jonathan M. Kalman, Lalit Kalra, Young‐Hoon Kim, Deirdre A. Lane, Gregory Y.H. Lip, Steven A. Lubitz, Manlio F. Márquez, Tatjana Potpara, Domingo Pozzer, Jeremy N. Ruskin, Irina Savelieva, Wee Siong Teo, Hung‐Fat Tse, Atul Verma, Shu Zhang, Mina K. Chung, William Fernando Bautista Vargas, Chern‐En Chiang, Alejandro Cuesta, Gheorghe‐Andrei Dan, David S. Frankel, Yutao Guo, Róbert Hatala, Young Soo Lee, Yuji Murakawa, Cara N. Pellegrini, Cláudio Pinho, David Milan, Daniel P. Morin, Elenir Nadalin, George Ntaios, Mukund A. Prabhu, Marco Proietti, Léna Rivard, Mariana Valentino, Alena Shantsila

Bibliographic record

VenueEP Europace · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsSouthlake Regional Health Center
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsHeart RhythmRhythmInternal medicineCardiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract

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)0.104
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.127
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1040.127
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations94
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEP EuropaceSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207