MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 9791: Sex Disparities in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) Outcomes: Findings From the Ontario ICD Database

2011· article· en· W119105811 on OpenAlexaffabout
Derek R. MacFadden, Eugene Crystal, Andrew D. Krahn, Iqwal Mangat, Jeff S. Healey, Paul Dorian, Yaariv Khaykin, David Birnie, Christopher S. Simpson, Arnold Pintér, Andrew Calzavara, Jack V. Tu, Douglas S. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of OttawaWestern UniversitySouthlake Regional Health CenterQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorICD-10Medical emergencyIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineCardiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sex disparities may exist in decisions to implant an ICD, complications and patient outcomes, but contributing factors are not fully elucidated. We determined if men and women who were referred or implanted with an ICD differed in their device use, complications, and outcomes. METHODS: We examined prospectively-enrolled patients referred for consideration of ICD implantation in Ontario between Feb 2007 to Jul 2010 in the Ontario ICD Database. Patients were followed for 45-day complications, and occurrence of ICD-delivered therapies (i.e., appropriate shock, appropriate therapy, and inappropriate therapy) and death within one-year follow-up. Multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and hazard ratios (aHR) > 1.0 signified increased likelihood of implantation, complications, ICD-delivered therapies, or death in women. RESULTS: Of 6021 patients (4733 men) referred for ICD implantation, 1155 women (89.7%) and 4294 men (90.7%) received devices, with an overall aOR of 0.87 (95%CI; 0.69-1.10, p=0.24). Women were significantly more likely than men to have a minor (aOR 1.55; 95%CI; 1.09-2.20, p=0.014), major (aOR 1.78, 95%CI; 1.24-2.58, p=0.002), or any complication (aOR 1.50, 95%CI; 1.12-2.00, p=0.006). Among 5213 persons (4108 men) contributing 3,860 person-years of follow-up, there was a lower likelihood of appropriate ICD-delivered therapies in women. Adjusted HRs were 0.69 (95%CI; 0.51-0.93, p=0.015) for appropriate shock, 0.73 (95%CI; 0.59-0.90, p=0.003) for appropriate ICD-delivered therapy, and 0.97 (95%CI; 0.64-1.55, p=0.885) for inappropriate shock ( Figure ). Mortality did not differ among male and female ICD recipients: aHR=1.00 (95%CI; 0.64-1.55, p=0.988). CONCLUSIONS: ICD implantation rates were similar in men and women after referral to an electrophysiologist. Female ICD recipients exhibited higher rates of early complications and were less likely to experience appropriate shocks or antitachycardia therapy than men.

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)0.003
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 score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies→French-language works237,207→