Prognostic significance of elevated troponin in non-cardiac hospitalized patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
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
Cardiac biomarker troponin can be elevated in patients without a primary cardiac diagnosis and may have prognostic value. We conducted a systematic review to estimate the prevalence and prognostic significance of elevated troponin levels in patients admitted to hospital without a primary cardiac diagnosis. Literature search was done using MEDLINE (1946 to November 2012), EMBASE (1974 to Week 45, 2012), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (November 2012). Two independent investigators reviewed full-text studies for final inclusion. We included studies of patients admitted without a primary cardiac diagnosis. Eligible studies compared adverse outcomes in patients with normal versus elevated troponin levels. Twenty-seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. Elevated troponin was associated with increased in-hospital and 30-day mortality (25 studies, 7255 patients, OR 3.88, 95% CI 2.90-5.19, P < 0.0001). Elevated troponin was also associated with increased risk of long-term mortality at 6 months (9 studies, 5368 patients, OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.84-9.64, P < 0.00001). Troponin is an independent predictor of short-term mortality with a pooled adjusted OR of 2.36, 95% CI 1.47-3.76, P < 0.0003. In conclusion, elevated troponin in non-cardiac patients is independently associated with increased mortality.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.026 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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