MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does Aggressive Care Following Acute Myocardial Infarction Reduce Mortality? Analysis with Instrumental Variables to Compare Effectiveness in Canadian and United States Patient Populations

2003· article· en· W1578031711 on OpenAlex
Christine A. Beck, John R. Penrod, Theresa W. Gyorkos, Stan Shapiro, Louise Pilote

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMyocardial infarctionMedicineInstrumental variableEmergency medicineDemographyIntensive care medicineEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyInternal medicineEconometricsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous U.S. studies suggest that the incremental ("marginal") use of the aggressive approach to care for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in patients differing only in their distance to hospitals offering aggressive care may be associated with small mortality benefits. We hypothesized that the marginal benefits should be larger in Canada, as the country is operating on a lower margin because the approach to care is more conservative overall. METHODS: This retrospective study used administrative data of hospital admissions and health services for all patients admitted for a first AMI in Quebec in 1988 (n = 8,674). We used differential distances to hospitals offering aggressive care as instrumental variables when measuring mortality up to four years after AMI. RESULTS: Of the 4,422 subjects who were > or = 65 years old, 11 percent received cardiac catheterization within 90 days after admission. In a previous study that applied similar methodology to the 1987 U.S. Medicare population, 23 percent of subjects received catheterization within 90 days. As in the U.S. study, we found that subjects living closer to hospitals offering aggressive care were more likely to receive aggressive care than subjects living further away (26 percent versus 19 percent received cardiac catheterization within 90 days; 95 percent CI: 5 percent to 9 percent). Unlike the U.S. study, we found no differences in mortality across the "close" versus "far" differential distance groups (unadjusted differences at one year: 1 percent; 95 percent CI: -1 percent to 3 percent). This absence of association held in elderly (> or = 65 years) and younger age groups. Adjusted results also showed no differences between subjects receiving aggressive versus conservative care (at one year: 4 percent; 95 percent CI: -11 percent to 20 percent). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to our hypothesis, but consistent with results from numerous randomized trials and observational studies, we cannot confirm that, on the margin, the aggressive approach to post-AMI care is associated with mortality benefits in Canada.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.390 · 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