MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998654552 · doi:10.1159/000176431

Recent Advances and Future Directions in Myocardial Infarction

2008· review· en· W1998654552 on OpenAlexaff
Álvaro Avezum, Marcus Flather, Salim Yusuf

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsHamilton General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionThrombolysisIntensive care medicineCause of deathRisk factorDiseasePercutaneous coronary interventionPrimary angioplastyMedical emergencyCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in most industrialised countries and is a major source of health care expenditure worldwide. Identification and management of risk factors for the development of coronary heart disease (CHD) have enormous potential for improving health and reducing health care costs. There is evidence that the reduction in deaths from CHD has occurred earlier and to a greater extent in countries with aggressive policies of cardiovascular risk factor intervention. Likewise, the treatment of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (MI) should be aimed at both extending event-free survival and improving the quality of life. This review focuses on recent advances and future directions in the understanding of risk factor modification before an MI (prevention), treatment of MI including thrombolysis and primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, and the subsequent management of patients after MI.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiologySame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207