MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1577113804

Effects of enhanced external counterpulsation on anginal symptoms and improvements in objective measures of myocardial ischaemia.

2008· article· en· W1577113804 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maryam Yavari, H R Montazeri

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyAnginaInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseEjection fractionShahidCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyDiastoleArteryMyocardial infarctionBlood pressureHeart failure
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP) is a novel, potentially beneficial adjunct therapy used for angina pectoris. We assessed the efficacy of this method in relieving angina and improving objective measures of myocardial ischaemia. METHODS: All patients (67) who referred for EECP to Shahid Chamran Hospital, Isfahan, Iran from 2002 to 2005 were included. Demographic data, coronary artery disease (CAD) risk factors and baseline angiographic data were collected. Anginal symptoms, Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) functional class, echocardiographic parameters (ejection fraction, left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic diameters) and exercise test duration before and after the treatment were compared. RESULTS: Seventy-seven per cent of patients who had undergone EECP had a positive clinical response. Exercise test duration and CCS functional class improved after the treatment. However, EECP had no significant effect on echocardiographic parameters. Efficacy was independent of age, gender, CAD risk factors, prior CCS functional class and echocardiographic parameters. Patients without left main artery involvement and those who had at least one non-obstructed artery demonstrated a greater likelihood of improvement. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggested that EECP is a safe, well tolerated, and significantly effective treatment for angina pectoris.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207