MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W150962395

[Postinfarction angina in elderly patients: results of surgical and drug treatment].

2002· article· ru· W150962395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ardashev Vn, Mikheev Aa, Liapkova Nb

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnginaMyocardial infarctionEjection fractionCardiologyConcomitantInternal medicineArteryCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyBypass graftingInfarctionSurgeryHeart failure
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical and angiographical characteristics and results of surgical treatment and drug therapy were assessed in 49 men with postinfarction angina (mean age 64.1-/+3.5 years) and 112 patients with progressing and stable angina (mean age 63.8-/+3.0 years). Of 49 patients with postinfarction angina 30 were subjected to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) while 19 were treated with drugs only. Remote results were known in 17 and 19 patients of surgical and conservative groups, respectively. Average duration of follow-up was 66-/+20 months. Compared with patients with progressing and stable angina those with postinfarction angina had similar amplitude of ST-segment deviation during stress tests, ejection fraction, average number of involved coronary vessels, and profile of concomitant diseases, but higher prevalence of left main stenoses (23.6 and 40.8%, respectively, p=0.05). Among patients with postinfarction angina available for follow-up long-term survival of those treated with CABG was higher compared with patients treated conservatively (p=0.02). Nonfatal myocardial infarction developed in 17.7 and 31.6%, symptomatic improvement was registered in 76.5 and 5.3% of patients in surgical and conservative groups, respectively. In patients with postinfarction angina aged >or=60 years CABG surgery compared with drug therapy was associated with better survival and improved symptomatic status.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207