Prevalence and clinical significance of electrocardiographic complete right bundle branch block in young individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: There is limited information on the clinical significance of complete right bundle branch block (CRBBB) in young individuals. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and significance of CRBBB in a large cohort of young individuals aged 14-35 years old. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 2008 to 2018, 104,369 consecutive individuals underwent cardiovascular assessment with a health questionnaire, electrocardiogram, clinical consultation, and selective echocardiography. Follow-up was obtained via direct telephone consultations. Mean follow-up was 7.3 ± 2.7 years. CRBBB was identified in 154 (0.1%) individuals and was more prevalent in males compared with females (0.20 vs. 0.06%; P < 0.05) and in athletes compared with non-athletes (0.25 vs. 0.14%; P < 0.05). CRBBB-related cardiac conditions were identified in seven (5%) individuals (four with atrial septal defect, one with Brugada syndrome, one with progressive cardiac conduction disease, and one with atrial fibrillation). Pathology was more frequently identified in individuals with non-isolated CRBBB compared with individuals with isolated CRBBB (14 vs. 1%; P < 0.05) and in individuals with a QRS duration of ≥130 ms compared with individuals with a QRS of <130 ms (10 vs. 1%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of CRBBB in young individuals was 0.1% and was more prevalent in males and in athletes. CRBBB-related conditions were identified in 5% of individuals and were more common in individuals with non-isolated CRBBB and more pronounced intraventricular conduction delay (QRS duration of ≥130 ms). Secondary evaluation should be considered for young individuals with CRBBB with symptoms, concerning family history, additional electrocardiographic anomalies, or significant QRS prolongation (≥130 ms).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".