MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997021241 · doi:10.1002/clc.4960290207

Two-year outcomes in patients with mild refractory angina treated with enhanced external counterpulsation

2006· article· en· W1997021241 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cardiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyAnginaRevascularizationMaceInternal medicineCardiologyQuality of life (healthcare)Refractory (planetary science)Adverse effectMyocardial infarctionConventional PCI

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the International Enhanced External Counterpulsation Patient Registry (IEPR), approximately 85% of the patients treated are in Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class III-IV with no option for further invasive coronary revascularization procedures. HYPOTHESIS: This study sought to determine whether it is clinically important to establish whether the observed durable reduction in disabling severe angina with enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP) treatment can be extended to those with less severe CCS class II angina, who also have no option for further revascularization. METHODS: This study evaluated the immediate response, durability and clinical events over a 2-year period after EECP treatment in 112 patients with Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class II angina versus 1346 patients with class III-IV angina using data from the International EECP Patient Registry (IEPR). RESULTS: Treatment with EECP significantly (by at least one CCS class) reduced angina frequency, nitroglycerin use, and improved quality of life in both groups. At 2-year follow-up, 74% of class II and 70% of class III-IV patients remained free of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and continued to demonstrate a durable CCS class improvement over baseline. CONCLUSION: The robust effectiveness of EECP as a noninvasive device, together with its relatively low start-up and recurrent costs, makes it an attractive consideration for treating patients with milder refractory angina in addition to the patient with severely disabling angina treated in current 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.302 · 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