MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409817350 · doi:10.1161/circep.124.013465

Long-Term Clinical Benefits of Pulsed Field Ablation in Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Subanalyses From the Multicenter inspIRE Trial

2025· letter· en· W4409817350 on OpenAlexaff
Tom De Potter, Massimo Grimaldi, Mattias Duytschaever, Ante Anić, Johan Vijgen, Petr Neužil, Hugo Van Herendael, Atul Verma, Allan C. Skanes, Helmut Pürerfellner, Gediminas Račkauskas, Pierre Jaı̈s, Vivek Y. Reddy

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology · 2025
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationAblationCardiologyParoxysmal atrial fibrillationInternal medicineClinical trialCatheter ablation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors thank all inspIRE study (Study for Treatment of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation [PAF] by Pulsed Field Ablation [PFA] System With Irreversible Electroporation [IRE]) personnel and patients for their valuable participation in this trial. The authors thank the following individuals for their efforts in trial execution, statistical analysis, and input during the development of this article: Christina Kaneko, Jaclyn Alcazar, Guixia Huang, Stephen Hynes, Ramona Wu, Carmen Rousseeuw, Sarah Rabau, and Nathalie Marcours. Michelle Hughes, PhD, of Lumanity Communications Inc, provided medical writing and editorial support, funded by Biosense Webster, Inc, under the direction of the authors. The inspIRE Trial Investigators: Luigi Di Biase, Jim Hansen, Sebastien Knecht, Georgios Kollias, Peter Lukac, Andrea Natale, Jan Petru, and Thomas Phlips.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Arrhythmia and ElectrophysiologySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207