Assessing the impact and safety of implantable cardioverter defibrillators in treating catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While the guidelines acknowledge the anticipated benefits of using an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in individuals with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT). However, the potential adverse effects have received less attention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To address this issue comprehensively, we will explore various databases such as the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE and PubMed. Our study will include CPVT patients, both with and without ICD implantation. Two researchers will evaluate the eligible studies independently and gather pertinent data. The quality of the studies included will be assessed using either the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data analysis will be conducted using RevMan. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Because this research depends exclusively on existing studies, obtaining patient informed consent and ethics approval is unnecessary. The results of this meta-analysis will be shared at conferences or in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022370824.
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 | 0.051 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.004 |
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".