Quality of life one year after myocardial revascularization. Is preoperative quality of life important?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Of 428 patients, mean age of 64.1+/-9.2 (30-84 years), undergoing an isolated CABG, pre- and one-year- postoperatively angina level and quality of life (QOL) were registered. QOL was registered following the EuroQol-registration, five domains and a visual analogue scale (VAS). Based on the VAS, the group was divided into Group A, 168 patients with a VAS < 60 and Group B, 260 patients with a VAS > or = 60. One-year postoperatively, 394 patients (92.%) indicated to be angina-free. The VAS of the total group was significantly higher one-year post-CABG, 75.3 vs. 61.7 (P=0.00). Of group A, 88% of patients registered a higher VAS. In group B only 60.8% registered a higher and 26.9% a lower VAS. Multivariate analysis identified preoperative VAS < 60 and a preoperative mobility level > 1 as independent predictors for an increased QOL. Thus our conclusion is that relief of angina one year post-CABG is associated with an increased QOL, however, patients with a relatively poor preoperative QOL have a more beneficial QOL. But patients with a good preoperative QOL can lose a lot of QOL.
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 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".