Guidelines for assessment of cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias in small animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac arrhythmias are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although recent advances in cell-based models, including human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (iPSC-CM), are contributing to our understanding of electrophysiology and arrhythmia mechanisms, preclinical animal studies of cardiovascular disease remain a mainstay. Over the past several decades, animal models of cardiovascular disease have advanced our understanding of pathological remodeling, arrhythmia mechanisms, and drug effects and have led to major improvements in pacing and defibrillation therapies. There exist a variety of methodological approaches for the assessment of cardiac electrophysiology and a plethora of parameters may be assessed with each approach. This guidelines article will provide an overview of the strengths and limitations of several common techniques used to assess electrophysiology and arrhythmia mechanisms at the whole animal, whole heart, and tissue level with a focus on small animal models. We also define key electrophysiological parameters that should be assessed, along with their physiological underpinnings, and the best methods with which to assess these parameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".