MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4300688600

Retrospective review of atrial fibrillation in Standardbred racehorses at a tertiary care facility in Atlantic Canada.

2022· article· en· W4300688600 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer Burns, Kathleen MacMillan, Emily John

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuinidineCardioversionAtrial fibrillationPopulationDigoxinGynecologyInternal medicineHeart failure
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most clinically relevant cardiac arrhythmia identified in the Standardbred racehorse. However, there is limited literature regarding athletic ability in Standardbred racehorses following AF conversion. To investigate this issue, the objectives of this review were to: i) determine the success rate in using quinidine sulphate to treat AF in a population of hospitalized equine patients in Atlantic Canada between January 2008 and December 2019; and ii) measure return to athletic ability (using racetrack earnings and top-3 finishes) following cardioversion with quinidine sulphate in a population of Standardbred racehorses. Overall, 73% (16/22) of AF instances in this study were successfully treated with enteral quinidine sulphate. No significant difference was detected in racetrack earnings or number of top-3 finishes for each horse that raced at least 5 times pre- and post-conversion. Key clinical message: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first published review to assess the athletic ability of Standardbred racehorses following cardioversion with enteral quinidine sulphate. Based on the current information, it does not appear that treatment of AF with quinidine sulphate affects future athletic performance in horses that achieved cardioversion.

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)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.861

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→