MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Clinical, Electrocardiographic and Echocardiographic Predictors of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence after Pulmonary Vein Isolation

2025· preprint· en· W4406185004 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Aikaterini-Eleftheria Karanikola, Melpomeni Tzortzi, Athanasios Kordalis, Ioannis Doundoulakis, C. Antoniou, Ageliki Laina, Panagiotis Tsioufis, Athanasios Sakalidis, Konstantinos Pamporis, Konstantinos Tsioufis, Dimitris Tsiachris

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Association for the Study of the Liver
KeywordsPulmonary veinAtrial fibrillationCardiologyInternal medicineIsolation (microbiology)MedicineP wave

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a supraventricular arrhythmia and the most common heart rhythm disorder in the adult population worldwide with an estimated prevalence of 2% to 4% of the population. Cases of AF have shown an increasing trend in recent decades, while its frequency is expected to rise even more. Given the significant impact on patients’ quality of life, as well as its major complications -including thromboembolic events- effective rhythm control strategies other than antiarrhythmic medication have emerged, with catheter ablation (CA) being the cornerstone of these. During recent years, CA has been upgraded into first-line treatment for selected patients. However, complications do exist and arrhythmia-free survival is not always warranted. The need to better identify patients more suitable for this specific therapeutic measure is crucial in improving outcomes and preventing arrhythmia recurrences. This review aims to present currently identified predictors of AF recurrence after catheter ablation based on clinical characteristics, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters, in an era of increasing interventional rhythm control approaches for the management of AF.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.org→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→