MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Electrophysiological Changes in Simulated Atrial Sheets Due to Sympathetic Hyperactivity

2024· article· en· W4405488758 on OpenAlexaff
Karl Magtibay, Yusuf Abderrahman, Stéphane Massé, Kumaraswamy Nanthakumar, Karthikeyan Umapathy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrophysiologyCardiologyElectrocardiographyInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electrophysiological changes in the atria due to sympathetic hyperactivity during episodes of psychological distress are unclear. We simulated sympathetic hyperactivity by rapidly pacing atrial sheets with increasing adrenergic stimulation (AS) spatial densities. We measured changes to the electrophysiological parameters of atrial sheets, such as captured waves (CW), conduction speed (CS), slope of depolarization (SoD), isolated conduction channels (ICC), and wavefront ratio (WFR), using videos and action potential signals. The number of CWs could be limited by as much as 90% in atrial sheets with 50% AS elements, indicating a physiological block. While CS is maintained, SoD for atrial sheets with 15% AS elements is 20% faster than plain atrial sheets. ICCs appear in atrial sheets with ≥15% AS spatial densities. ICCs temporally vary by as much as 60% in atrial sheets with 20% AS elements. WFR decreases by as much as 40% due to minimal ICCs. We found significant differences for each parameter across AS spatial densities via Kruskal-Wallis test (p ≤ 0.001). Our findings may provide a potential electrophysiological basis for atrial arrhythmias due to psychological distress.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207