MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404751174 · doi:10.1177/23969873241300888

Time-varying differences in stroke recurrence risk between types of atrial fibrillation based on screening methods and timing of detection

2024· article· en· W4404751174 on OpenAlex
Alonso Alvarado‐Bolaños, Diana Ayán, Facundo Lodol, Alexander V. Khaw, Jennifer Mandzia, Marko Mrkobrada, Maria Bres-Bullrich, Lorraine Fleming, Corbin Lippert, M. Cecile, Rodrigo Bagur, Sebastián Fridman, Luciano A. Sposato

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

VenueEuropean Stroke Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsLawson Health Research InstituteWindsor Regional HospitalWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationStroke (engine)MedicineCardiologyStroke riskInternal medicineIschemic strokeEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) burden progresses with time. Among ischemic stroke (IS) patients, AF can be detected at different burden progression stages based on the timing and screening method. We hypothesized that AF detected after IS on 12-lead ECGs (ECG-AF) and via 14-day-Holter prolonged cardiac monitoring (AFDAS) are linked to lower IS recurrence risk than AF known before stroke occurrence (KAF) because of being at an earlier progression stage than KAF. Additionally, we posited that IS recurrence risk differences between AF types vary over time due to their differential progression stages. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study including IS/TIA patients with KAF, ECG-AF, and AFDAS [2018-2021]. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) were estimated using multivariable cause-specific Cox proportional-hazard models to compare IS recurrence between ECG-AF versus KAF and AFDAS versus KAF. Proportional hazards assumptions were tested to assess whether IS recurrence risk differences were time-varying. RESULTS: Of 758 AF patients (385 KAF, 236 ECG-AF, 137 AFDAS), 603 received anticoagulation and 59 experienced a recurrent IS after 1441 patient-years of follow-up. No IS recurrence risk differences were observed at the end of follow-up between ECG-AF and KAF (aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.36-1.26), although ECG-AF showed lower risk only within the first year (aHR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04-0.56). AFDAS exhibited a lower IS recurrence risk than KAF (aHR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.63), without time-varying differences. DISCUSSION: Differences in IS recurrence risk between ECG-AF and KAF varied over time. However, AFDAS showed a consistently lower IS risk than KAF throughout the entire study period.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.278 · 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