MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409202100 · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2025.03.031

Common Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Issues Encountered by Cardiology Trainees

2025· article· en· W4409202100 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Vincent Kent Le, Erkan İlhan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineInterventional cardiologyMedical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiology trainees often provide care for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). During their call shifts, cardiology trainees may be asked to assess whether pacemakers or ICDs have issues such as failure to sense, failure to capture, or failure to pace. They may also encounter pacemaker-mediated tachycardia (PMT) or inappropriate tracking of atrial arrhythmias. Trainees are also often involved in the management of patients receiving ICD shocks.

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)0.014
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.290
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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Cardiology→Same topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies→French-language works237,207→