MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413997229 · doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2025.08.020

Rationale and design of the comparative effectiveness of ICD vs non-ICD therapy in contemporary heart failure patients at a low risk for arrhythmic death (CONTEMP-ICD) trial

2025· article· en· W4413997229 on OpenAlexaff
Ilan Goldenberg, Wojciech Zaręba, Justin A. Ezekowitz, Christine Albert, Jeffrey D. Alexis, Lisa Anderson, Elijah R. Behr, James P. Daubert, Katherine E. Di Palo, Kenneth A. Ellenbogen, Dillon J. Dzikowicz, Eileen Hsich, David T. Huang, James L. Januzzi, Anas Jawaid, Valentina Kutyifa, Anuradha Lala-Trindade, Anekwe Onwuanyi, Ileana L. Piña, Roopinder K. Sandhu, Samuel F. Sears, Jakub Sroubek, Tina Baykaner, Robert L. Strawderman, Christopher A. Beck, Javed Butler

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersAssociation of Black CardiologistsHeart Failure Society of AmericaPatient-Centered Outcomes Research InstituteHeart Rhythm SocietyAmerican College of Cardiology FoundationAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.065
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0650.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Heart Journal→Same topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies→French-language works237,207→