Morbidity and mortality in patients waiting for coronary artery bypass surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe morbidity and mortality in patients waiting for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and to assess determinants for the occurrence of these complications. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out in a tertiary referral general teaching hospital. Three hundred and sixty consecutive patients with a priority of routine or urgent who were accepted for CABG or CABG with additional valve surgery were evaluated. Follow-up began from the moment of acceptance until the procedure took place for cardiac death, myocardial infarction and unstable angina requiring hospital admission. RESULTS: The median (25-75th percentile) waiting time in the two priority groups was 100 (79-119) days for the routine group and 69 (38-91) days for the urgent group. Overall, eight patients died, seven suffered a myocardial infarction, and 33 episodes of unstable angina requiring immediate hospitalization occurred. The majority of events took place during the first 30 days on the waiting list. Unstable angina less than 3 months before acceptance was identified as an independent predictor (hazard ratio 2.5, 95% confidence interval 1.2-5.1) for complications during the wait. The prognostic value of smoking and familial cardiovascular disease was found to vary depending on the priority assigned to the patient. CONCLUSIONS: Complications occur relatively early during the time on the waiting list. If complications in coronary heart disease cannot be predicted more accurately, the only way to diminish the complication rate is drastic reduction of waiting times.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".