MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Epicardial Pulsed Field Ablation of Ganglionated Plexi: Computational and Pre-Clinical Evaluation of a Bipolar Sub-Xiphoid Catheter for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation

2023· article· en· W4390176285 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

VenueBioengineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsRoyal Jubilee HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAblationAtrial fibrillationCardiac AblationMedicineCatheterCardiologyCatheter ablationInternal medicineBiomedical engineeringSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epicardial pulsed field ablation (PFA) of ganglionated plexi (GPs) is being explored as a potential treatment for atrial fibrillation. Initial work using open-chest access with a monopolar ablation device has been completed. This study describes the early development work for a device that can be used with subxiphoid access and deliver bipolar ablation pulses. Electric field computational models have been used for the initial guidance on pulse parameters. An in vivo assessment of these ablation parameters has been performed in an open-chest canine study, while subxiphoid access and navigation of the device has been demonstrated in a porcine model. Results from this acute study have demonstrated the promising potential of this approach.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.302 · 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