MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414520012 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.70042

Future Development of Arrhythmogenic Risk Scores in Patients with Heart Failure and Inherited Dilated Cardiomyopathy. A Scientific Statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC

2025· article· en· W4414520012 on OpenAlexaff
Marta Gigli, Job A.J. Verdonschot, Pablo García‐Pavía, Lorenzo Monserrat, Sanjay Prasad, Andrea Mazzanti, Folkert W. Asselbergs, Barbara Bauce, Philippe Charron, Dana Dawson, Brian P. Halliday, Luisa Mestroni, Petar Seferović, Upasana Tayal, Maite Tome, J. Peter van Tintelen, Stéphane Heymans, Antonios Pantazis, Marco Metra, Gianfranco Sinagra

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk stratificationHeart failureSudden cardiac deathPopulationGenetic testingRisk assessmentWeaknessSudden death

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in the general population of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) has progressively declined with the implementation of novel medical strategies. However, still cases occur in young individuals and the challenge of risk stratification remains unsolved. Traditional criteria, including left ventricular ejection fraction, have demonstrated their profound weakness to identify subjects at high risk of SCD in this specific context. The increasing availability of genetic information has allowed identification of certain genotypes with a high arrhythmic risk that deserve a more individualized approach. Recent European guidelines recognized the contribution of genetic information in clinical decision-making. Gene-specific risk stratification tools have been developed, and in some cases externally validated, which can support clinicians in the decisions on SCD primary prevention interventions. However, they are generally based on basic variables, whereas the growing amount of knowledge on novel methods for risk prediction, and in particular the solid data on the predictive value of cardiac magnetic resonance tissue characterization (i.e. late gadolinium enhancement) are not incorporated in available scores, and more in general, are not systematically part of the clinical work-up. In this scientific statement, we summarized the current state of the art concerning the risk stratification of SCD in DCM, with particular emphasis on genetic forms, highlight the weaknesses of the available strategies and the potential actions needed for improving them. Available risk stratification tools are discussed, and methodologies that should be incorporated in future prognostication models are summarized. Lastly, a point-by-point summary of the key prerequisites for developing the future arrhythmogenic risk scores in patients with DCM is provided.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207