MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383302726 · doi:10.1007/s12471-023-01797-w

Current gaps in knowledge in inherited arrhythmia syndromes

2023· review· en· W4383302726 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNetherlands Heart Journal · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardiaBrugada syndromeMedicineLong QT syndromeCardiac arrhythmiaIntensive care medicineVentricular tachycardiaInternal medicineQT intervalAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 3 most common inherited arrhythmia syndromes-Brugada syndrome, congenital long QT syndrome and catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia-were initially described in the previous century. Since then, research has evolved, which has enabled us to identify patients prior to the onset of potentially life-threatening symptoms. However, there are significant gaps in knowledge that complicate clinical management of these patients today. With this review paper, we aim to highlight the most important knowledge gaps in clinical research of these inherited arrhythmia syndromes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.325 · 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