MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394915166 · doi:10.1148/ryct.230216

Cardiac MRI after Sudden Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review

2024· review· en· W4394915166 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bernhard Scharinger, Elke Boxhammer, Richard Rezar, Stefan Hecht, Sarah Wernly, Tobias Widhalm, Michael Lichtenauer, Uta C. Hoppe, Klaus Hergan, Bernhard Wernly, Bernhard Strohmer, Reinhard Kaufmann

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology Cardiothoracic Imaging · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSudden cardiac arrestSudden cardiac deathMedicineCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To perform a systematic review to assess the diagnostic and prognostic value of cardiac MRI after sudden cardiac arrest (SCA). Materials and Methods PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for studies investigating cardiac MRI after SCA in adult patients (≥18 years of age). The time frame of the encompassed studies spans from January 2012 to January 2023. The study protocol was preregistered in OSF Registries (www.osf.io/nxaev), and the systematic review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. Results Fourteen studies involving 1367 individuals, 1257 (91.9%) of whom underwent cardiac MRI, were included. Inconsistent findings were reported on the diagnostic value of cardiac MRI–specific findings. The included studies demonstrated the following main findings: (a) cardiac MRI led to a new or alternative diagnosis in patients with SCA; (b) cardiac MRI identified pathologic or arrhythmogenic substrates; (c) cardiac MRI helped detect myocardial edema (potentially reversible); (d) cardiac MRI provided evidence for the occurrence of adverse events; and (e) functional markers or ventricular dimensions were considered prognostically relevant in a few studies. Relevant challenges in this systematic review were the lack of comparators and reference standards relative to cardiac MRI as the index test and patient selection bias. Conclusion Cardiac MRI following SCA can contribute to the diagnostic process and offer supplementary information essential for treatment planning. Limitations of the review include studies with insufficient comparators and potential bias in patient selection. Systematic review registration link: osf.io/nxaev Keywords: Cardiac MRI, Cardiovascular Disease, Cardiomyopathy, Ischemia, Myocardial Edema, Sudden Cardiac Arrest © RSNA, 2024

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.009
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiology Cardiothoracic ImagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207