MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405435656 · doi:10.22489/cinc.2024.417

Automatic Analysis of Activation Recovery Interval in Heterogeneous Fibrotic Tissue from Chronically Infarcted Swine

2024· article· en· W4405435656 on OpenAlexafffund
Rafael Silva, Jairo Rodríguez-Padilla, Mihaela Pop, Maxime Sermesant

Bibliographic record

VenueComputing in cardiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfrared Thermography in Medicine
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scar-related myocardial tissue can lead to ventricular arrhythmia (VA), a global concern for sudden cardiac death.Repolarization dispersion due to electrical remodeling within infarcted territory often triggers ventricular arrhythmias.However, evaluating ventricular repolarization globally is clinically challenging and there is no gold-standard approach.This paper introduces a new method using body-surface leads to automate activation (ATs) and recovery times (RTs) detection in unipolar electrograms (UEs).Multilevel Discrete Wavelet Transform sets activation and recovery detection windows based on external lead data.Then, Wyatt's method is used to compute ATs and RTs.By analyzing catheter-based intracardiac electrograms from n=9 infarcted swine, we compare ARI values between healthy tissue and arrhythmia-prone border zones (BZ), and between normal sinus rhythm (NSR) and pacing.Results reveal significant ARI differences between NSR and pacing, and among tissue types, with heterogeneous ARI values highlighting the repolarization complexity within BZ.This emphasizes the necessity for new automated approaches in assessing and treating cardiac arrhythmias, acknowledging the diverse electrophysiological individual profiles.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputing in cardiologySame topicInfrared Thermography in MedicineFrench-language works237,207