A macroscopic electrocardiographic diagnosis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a comparison between the Italian and European guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of deep and diffuse negative T waves in the lateral leads should evoke the suspect of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, whose diagnosis occurs through echocardiography. In this article we want to consider the comparison between the COCIS Italian Guidelines (Cardiological Committee for eligibility to competitive sport) of 2009 and 2017, and the European ESC Guidelines (European Society of Cardiology) regarding the judgment of suitability for competitive sports. The echocardiographic finding of a hypertrophic left ventricle characterized by an interventricular septum of 22 mm, posterior wall of 13 mm, and a reduced size of the ventricular cavity to 51 mm, confirms the initial electrocardiography suspicion. The aim of our article was to compare the COCIS and ESC Guidelines on the subject with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy whose diagnosis, which is evident on an electrocardiographic level, needs an ultrasound confirmation without the need for additional imaging tests such as magnetic resonance. The question arises whether our sportsman can practice sports at a competitive level and, possibly, what type of activity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".