MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1763261651 · doi:10.4172/2368-0512.1000034

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant nonuse for acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department: An analysis from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 2002-2010

2015· article· en· W1763261651 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ankur Sethi, Rohit Arora

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent research. Cardiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency departmentMedicineEmergency medicineAmbulatoryMedical emergencyMyocardial infarctionAcute careEmergency medical servicesInternal medicineHealth careNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKgRouNd: Recent reports from quality improvement registries revealed high antiplatelet and anticoagulant use within 24 h of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). oBjeCtive: To produce an unbiased national estimate of the use of antiplatelets and anticoagulants during visits to the emergency department (ED) for AMI. MetHodS: Data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey for AMI visits from 2002 to 2010 were analyzed. The complex survey design was taken into consideration to ensure that reliable national estimates were produced. ReSultS: During the study period, there were 3,825,905308,534 estimated eligible ED visits for AMI. Acetylsalicylic acid was not used in 55.52.9%, 55.74.0% and 55. 24.8% of visits in 2002 to 2004, 2005 to 2007 and 2008 to 2010, respectively (P trend =0.96). The nonuse of thienopyridine or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) decreased during this period (92.91.4%, 88.12.6% and 83.43.4%, respectively; P trend =0.001). Anticoagulant nonuse did not change (72.12.6%, 68.03.7% and 65.54.4%, respectively; P trend =0.14). Even in definitive AMI visits, nonuse was high (acetylsalicylic acid, 48.74.5%, 44.76.2% and 55.65.6%, respectively, P trend =0.31; thienopyridine/GPI, 81.9%3.4%, 77.05.0% and 71.15.5%, respectively, P trend =0.001; and anticoagulants, 49.39.6%, 47.17.1% and 45.36.20%, respectively, P trend =0.24). ED visits in a metropolitan statistical area were more likely to receive acetylsalicylic acid (OR 2.27 [95% CI 1.02 to 5.09]) and anticoagulants (OR 3.34 [95% CI 1.54 to 7.24]). Similarly, visits evaluated by a consulting physician were more likely to receive thienopyridine/GPI (OR 2.24 [95% CI 1.22 to 4.13]) and anticoagulants (OR 1.73 [95% CI 1.14 to 2.63]). CoNCluSioN: In a significant proportion of AMI visits, including definitive AMI, antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies were not administered in the ED.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent research. CardiologySame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207