Coronary artery bypass graft surgery provides clinically important quality-of-life improvements over medical therapy in patients with ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commentary on : Mark DB, Knight JD, Velazquez EJ, et al. Quality-of-life outcomes with coronary artery bypass graft surgery in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2014;161:392–9[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4]. Early clinical trials comparing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery to medical treatments in the 1970s and 1980s indicate an improved survival for surgery patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. However, patients with severe LV dysfunction were not represented in these trials.1 Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure (STICH) was a trial aimed at comparing CABG surgery to the optimal medical therapy in ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients with an ejection fraction (EF) <0.35. A major secondary end point of the trial was health-related quality of life (QOL). These are the outcomes presented in this paper. Patients (n=1212) with EF of 0.35 or less and coronary artery disease … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DAnn%2BIntern%2BMed%26rft.volume%253D161%26rft.spage%253D392%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.7326%252FM13-1380%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F25222386%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/M13-1380&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=25222386&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F20%2F3%2F107.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000343894400014&link_type=ISI
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".