MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386586187 · doi:10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101266

Oropharynx pain, discomfort, and economic impact of transesophageal echocardiography for planned radio-frequency catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: A cross-sectional survey study

2023· article· en· W4386586187 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

VenueIJC Heart & Vasculature · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationThrombusCross-sectional studyCatheter ablationAnxietyInternal medicineEmergency medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: To survey the unmet medical needs associated with atrium thrombus screening in Chinese patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) for planned radio-frequency catheter ablation (RFCA). Methods: This cross-sectional survey study interviewed 300 patients who underwent their first TEE for planned RFCA. The surveyed information included patients' anxiety, oropharynx pain and discomfort, time expense, and patient satisfaction related to TEE examination. Patient preference for a new atrium thrombus screening technology, hospital length of stay (LOS) of RFCA, and hospital costs of RFCA in these surveyed patients were collected as well. Descriptive statistical methods were used to summarize the collected survey information. Results: Of the 300 interviewed patients, 36.3% reported anxiety before TEE examination, 58.6% reported oropharynx pain related to TEE, and 76.2% reported oropharynx discomforts, mainly including foreign body sensation (54.3%), dry heaves (33.8%), nausea (31.9%), and bleeding (22.9%). Even though 62.3% were satisfied with TEE, 84.3% preferred a new technology to replace TEE. Conducting outpatient TEE took more wait time (4.4 days vs. 0.1 days, p = 0.016) but led to significantly shorter hospital LOS (3.8 days vs. 6.4 days, p < 0.001) and significant lower hospital costs for RFCA (¥74,097 vs. ¥85,843, p < 0.001) than conducting inpatient TEE. Conclusions: Most AF patients experienced oropharynx pain and discomfort during or after TEE. Although more than half of AF patients were satisfied with TEE, most AF patients preferred a new technology to replace TEE for atrium thrombus screening. TEE was associated with economic impact on RFCA irrespective of TEE conducting settings.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.299 · 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