Gender and Short-Term Recovery from Cardiac Surgery
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been a lack of agreement regarding whether women have poorer outcomes than men following cardiac surgery. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effect of gender on early recovery from cardiac surgery. METHOD: Using a prospective descriptive design, 60 men and 60 women who had coronary artery bypass and/or valve surgery completed the study by participating in interviews in the immediate preoperative period and monthly through the third postoperative month. Measures of life quality, life satisfaction, expected/perceived recovery, functional status, global health status, and social support were examined. RESULTS: Preoperatively, women were more functionally limited (p = 0.019), and reported lower life satisfaction (p = 0.001) and social support (p = 0.006), than men. At 3 months postoperatively, there were few significant differences in outcome measures though women continued to report lesser social support (p = 0.002); women realized significantly greater improvement than men in functional status (p = 0.008); and neither age nor gender consistently predicted recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Recent studies focusing on gender differences in cardiac surgery recovery indicate fewer differences between men and women than once thought. However, the differences identified in this study (women's significantly greater improvement in functional status, lesser social support, and differences in the nature of work to which women return following their surgery) warrant concern and attention in clinical practice.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it