MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Review: Aldosterone blockade reduces mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction

2009· letter· en· W2023998636 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpironolactoneEplerenoneAldosteroneHeart failureCardiologyInternal medicineGuidelineRandomized controlled trialBlockade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ACP Journal Club18 August 2009Review: Aldosterone blockade reduces mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunctionPeter Liu, MDPeter Liu, MDUniversity of Toronto and Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (P.L.)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-02009 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Source CitationEzekowitz JA, McAlister FA. Aldosterone blockade and left ventricular dysfunction: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:469-77. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19066207Clinical Impact RatingsGIM/FP/GP: Hospitalists: Cardiology: References1 Hunt SA, Abraham WT, Chin MH, et al. ACC/AHA 2005 guideline update for the diagnosis and management of chronic heart failure in the adult: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to update the 2001 guidelines for the evaluation and management of heart failure): developed in collaboration with the American College of Chest Physicians and the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. 2005;112:e154-235. [PMID: 16160202] Google Scholar2 Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, et al. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:709-17. [PMID: 10471456] Google Scholar3 Struthers A, Krum H, Williams GH. A comparison of the aldosterone-blocking agents eplerenone and spironolactone. Clin Cardiol. 2008;31:153-8. [PMID: 18404673] Google Scholar4 Arnold JM, Liu P, Demers C, et al. Canadian Cardiovascular Society consensus conference recommendations on heart failure 2006: diagnosis and management. Can J Cardiol. 2006;22:23-45. [PMID: 16450016] Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: University of Toronto and Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (P.L.)This article was published at Annals.org on 4 August 2009. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics 18 August 2009Volume 151, Issue 4Page: JC2-9KeywordsACE inhibitorsAldosteroneHeart failureHospitalizationsRenal failureSaltsSystematic reviewsTreatment guidelines ePublished: 18 August 2009 Issue Published: 18 August 2009 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2009 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal MedicineSame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207