QTc Interval Prolongation and Its Association With Electrolyte Abnormalities and Psychotropic Drug Use Among Patients With Eating Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Eating disorders (EDs) often develop during adolescence with high mortality rates. Sudden cardiac death in these patients has been associated with corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation. The significance of extrinsic factors on QTc prolongation in populations with EDs remains controversial. This study assessed the relationship between QTc prolongation in paediatric patients with EDs and extrinsic factors, such as QTc-prolonging medications and electrolyte abnormalities to investigate whether an ED alone is associated with an increased prevalence of QTc prolongation. Methods Electrocardiograms, electrolytes, and psychopharmaceutical usage were retrospectively analysed from the charts of 264 paediatric patients with EDs. Descriptive statistics were used to assess QTc prolongation and its relationship with electrolyte abnormalities and psychopharmaceuticals. Results Of 264 patients, 227 had normal QTc intervals (<440 ms), whereas 37 had borderline prolonged (440-460 ms) or prolonged (>460 ms) intervals. The prevalence of QTc intervals exceeding 440 ms in patients with normal electrolytes and not using QTc-prolonging psychotropics mirrored that of the general population ( P = 0.59). Of the 23 patients taking psychotropics, 8 had abnormal QTc intervals. The average QTc was greater for patients using QTc-prolonging psychotropics ( P = 0.05) with a correlation between interval length and psychotropic usage ( P < 0.01). Average potassium ( P = 0.08), calcium ( P = 0.18), and magnesium ( P = 0.08) levels did not significantly differ between those with normal and abnormal QTc intervals. Conclusions This study suggests that EDs alone may not prolong QTc intervals in paediatric patients with EDs, but psychotropics appear to be a salient external factor in QTc prolongation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".