MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290989174 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2022.07.010

Treatment and Prevention of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) Infections

2022· review· en· W4290989174 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Phillips, Andrew D. Krahn, Jason G. Andrade, Santabhanu Chakrabarti, Christopher Thompson, D. James Harris, Jacqueline M. Forman, Shahzad S. Karim, Laurence D. Sterns, Lynn M. Fedoruk, Eric Partlow, Jamil Bashir

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Columbian HospitalVancouver General HospitalSt. Paul's HospitalRoyal Jubilee HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMedtronicBiotronikBayer
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicinePopulationGynecologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An expanded role for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in recent decades reflects an aging population and broader indications for devices, including both primary prevention and management of dysrhythmias. CIED infection is one of the most important device-related complications and has a major impact on mortality, quality of life, healthcare utilization, and cost. Unfortunately, the investigation and management of CIED infection remain complex, often necessitating complete and timely removal of the device and leads in order to eradicate the infection. In addition, the translation of knowledge from an extensive literature to a disparate group of medical practitioners has often been inadequate. This review of CIED infection management highlights the significant advances made during the past decade, including diagnostic criteria, advanced imaging, and next-generation sequencing for culture-negative cases or those in which uncertainty remains. We also outline the role and indication for powered lead extraction, the process of antibiotic choice and treatment duration, considerations related to the timing and location for reimplantation, and preimplantation risk stratification and associated interventions to reduce the risk of CIED infection.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207