Immigrants & Secondary Cardiac Prevention Therapy Adherence
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Adherence to guideline-recommended secondary cardiovascular prevention therapy (statins and cardiac rehabilitation) has been demonstrated to reduce the risk of all-cause mortality (Statins RRR 0.25, 95% CI 0.19-0.30; Cardiac Rehabilitation RRR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14-0.36) and secondary events.1,2 Yet, ≥50% of patients discontinue statin use within 12-month after an initial prescription and completion of cardiac rehabilitation is ≤20% in Ontario.3,4 Low statin adherence and cardiac rehab completion limits patients from realizing the full benefits of therapy. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of adherence to statins for secondary prevention reported that nonadherence to statins was greater in non-white ethnicities compared to white ethnicities (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.04-1.59) with geographical variation in outcomes.5 In respect to cardiac rehabilitation, the literature suggests that non-white ethnicities are less likely to complete cardiac rehabilitation compared to white participants.6,7 However, a gap remains in our knowledge of cardiac rehabilitation completion among immigrants due to lack of outcome reporting across clinical trials. The literature suggests that immigrants have improved health profiles relative to Canadian-born patients. Specifically, immigrants with ≤10 years of Canadian residency have greater medication adherence than immigrants with >10 of Canadian residency when compared to Canadian-born participants.6-9 This thesis was a planned sub-study of the Interventions Supporting Long-Term Adherence and Decreasing Cardiovascular Events (ISLAND) randomized control trial. The ISLAND study was a pragmatic, randomized controlled trial investigating the effect of educational reminders on adherence to guideline-recommended therapy post-myocardial infarction. Study participants were allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three groups: i) usual care, ii) educational reminders sent via post, or iii) combination post and interactive voice response educational reminders. Investigators were blinded to the allocation sequence, participant allocation, and outcome assessment. Medication adherence and completion of cardiac rehabilitation were assessed 12-months from baseline. This sub-study of ISLAND focused on participants who completed a 12-month outcome assessment with a recorded response to the following question, “Were you born a Canadian citizen?”. Immigrants experienced greater odds of statin adherence at 7-days (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.00-1.85) and 30 days (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.96-1.94) at one-year post-myocardial infarction, after adjusting for age, diabetes, sex, and smoking status. We found no evidence that immigration status was associated with cardiac rehabilitation completion (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72-1.14) after adjusting for age, diabetes, sex, smoking status, average neighborhood income quintile, education, and marital status. The odds of statin adherence at 7-days (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.89-2.18) and 30-days (OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.89-2.18) was greater in visual minorities than white patients, however the difference was not statistically significant. We found no evidence of an association between ethnicity and cardiac rehabilitation completion (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.75-1.29). Our analysis could not fully evaluate the healthy immigrant effect due to an insufficient sample size of immigrants with <10 years of Canadian residency exposure (n=29). In conclusion, we report a statistically significant 36% increase in the odds of 7-day and 30-day statin adherence in immigrants compared to Canadian-born patients. We also report that the odds of cardiac rehabilitation decreased by 9% in immigrants compared to Canadian-born patients at 12-months post-myocardial infarction but this was not statistically significant. Our findings offer support for the “healthy immigrant effect” continuing in immigrants with >10 years of Canadian residency exposure. We were unable to evaluate outcomes in immigrants with <10 years Canadian residency exposure due to a lack of sample size (n=29).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,032 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».