MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985577109 · doi:10.3329/uhj.v7i1.10205

Clinical Response of Enhanced External Counter Pulsation (EECP) Among Bangladeshi Ischemic Heart Disease Patients

2012· article· en· W1985577109 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
KMHS Sirajul Haque, Md Jabed Iqbal, Md Mahmudur Rahman Siddiqui, Khondaker Syedus Salehin

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Heart Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyAnginaInclusion and exclusion criteriaCoronary artery diseaseQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineCardiologyHeart failureStable anginaDiseaseCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EECP is used to stabilize the coronary circulation in patients with severe coronary artery disease when maximal medical therapy and/or invasive procedures have proven inadequate. This prospective observational study was done for a period of 12 months. 40 patients with angina and angiographically proven coronary artery disease, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria was enrolled in this study. Among 40 enrolled patients 30 (70%) patients completed their treatment. All the patients were in between 42 to 80 years age group. All patients required sublingual nitrate before started EECP treatment. But after completion of treatment, 75% patient required no nitrates. Who completed full course, 100% were improved their angina symptoms from class II, III, IV to class I. Overall 80% patients improved their quality of life. Those completed full course of treatment 100% patients improved their quality of life. EECP Heart therapy is now world-wide accepted alternative treatment option for those patients, who are not fit for surgery or any kind of interventional procedure and those developed heart failure. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/uhj.v7i1.10205 UHJ 2011; 7(1): 19-22

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Heart JournalSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207