An Annual, Prospective, International Study of Outpatients With Cardiovascular Disease or Risk Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess penetration and patterns of treatments in outpatients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or risk factors. STUDY: An international, observational survey of physicians treating outpatients with CVD or risk factors. DESIGN AND SETTING: A unique, diversified group of physicians caring for patients with CVD or risk factors is sampled annually in countries around the world. Participating physicians register up to 15 patients with CVD or risk factors, recording demographics, medical history, clinical data, diagnoses, and medications. The registry has run annually, with different cohorts of physicians and patients each year. RESULTS: Over 9 years, the CardioMonitor registry has included participation by 18,145 physicians, registering 264,570 patients from 16 countries. Of these, 100,495 (38%) patients had cardiac disease, 26,720 (10%) had cerebrovascular disease, and 21,231 (8%) had peripheral arterial disease (not exclusive diagnoses). The remainder, 139,234 (52.6%) patients did not have clinically significant vascular disease, but had risk factors, including hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidemia. CONCLUSION: This registry of outpatients with cardiovascular risk factors or disease with detailed medication use recorded offers new insights into trends in current practice of medicine for this large group of patients.
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 | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".