MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4246689790 · doi:10.24124/2019/58947

The understanding and management of stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation in Northern British Columbia

2019· dissertation· en· W4246689790 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra Marleau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationStroke (engine)MedicineManagement of atrial fibrillationRisk factorPopulationStroke riskIschemic strokeEmergency medicineCardiologyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects one percent of the global population, and eight percent of Canadians over the age of sixty-five years. AF is a common predicting factor for ischemic stroke and can cause a five-hundred percent increase in stroke risk. This study aimed to fill a gap in the current literature by investigating a demographic that have not been studied and explored how healthcare providers can improve uptake of preventative measures against stroke. This study investigates the understanding and management of stroke risk in patients with AF living in northern British Columbia through the use of in-depth interviews, using a qualitative-descriptive design. Data was analyzed thematically using NVIVO 11 into three separate themes: Living with AF; Stroke Prevention and Decision-making; and Navigation. Results from this research highlight the importance of people diagnosed with AF taking oral anticoagulation and providing education about their increased risk of stroke.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→