MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 12086: Predicting Long-Term Survival After De Novo Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation for Primary Prevention

2022· article· en· W4380786390 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chang Wang, Zihang Lu, Chris Simpson, Douglas S. Lee, Joan Tranmer

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsTed Rogers Centre for Heart ResearchQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorPrimary preventionProportional hazards modelEjection fractionPopulationInternal medicineIschemic cardiomyopathyCardiomyopathyCardiac resynchronization therapyDiseaseCardiologyHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Current guidelines recommend the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention of arrhythmia in patients with reduced ejection fraction cardiomyopathy. Little is known about the long-term outcomes of patients with ICDs in clinical practice. Objective: To develop a risk prediction model for 10-year survival after ICD implantation for primary prevention. Methods: In this population-based registry of all ICD patients across 18 centers in Ontario, CA, 5097 patients receiving ICD implant for primary prevention from February 2007 to March 2011 were followed for up to 10 years. Patients were randomly split 2:1 into derivation and internal validation cohorts to develop and validate a prognostic model using Cox regression and predictors measured at initial ICD evaluation. Results: Mean age was 65.3 years (SD 11.0), 664 patients were female (19.5%) and 2344 patients (69.0%) had ischemic cardiomyopathy for primary disease indication. 10-year survival was 45.7% (95% CI 44.0%-47.4%).The final prediction model included age, sex, disease indication, comorbidities and biomarkers at the time of ICD assessment ( Table 1 ). This model had good discrimination in derivation (AUC 0.80; 95% CI 0.78-0.81) and validation samples (0.79, 95% CI 0.77-0.81) and good calibration. Sensitivity analyses showed that the addition of device type, provider factors (implantation site, implanter volume, physician main specialty), sex-related interaction terms, and frailty scores did not significantly improve the prediction model. Conclusion: A combination of demographic and patient factors determined at baseline device evaluation enabled the prediction of 10-year survival in patients undergoing ICD for primary prevention in the clinical practice. Our findings may help identify and monitor individuals at risk of long-term mortality and may be useful in targeting future prevention strategies to enhance longevity in this high-risk population.

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)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies→French-language works237,207→