MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2055025169 · doi:10.1186/cc5409

Secondary prevention following surgical revascularisation: continuing under-use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors

2007· article· en· W2055025169 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew Turley, Andrew Thornley, Anthony Roberts, Robert Morley, W. Andrew Owens, Mark de Belder

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineSecondary preventionAspirinCoronary artery diseaseAngiotensin-converting enzymeIntensive care medicineInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade, coronary revascularisation has helped reduce mortality and morbidity rates from coronary artery disease. In addition to revascularisation, long-term prognosis is dependent on successful implementation of secondary prevention, in particular the use of aspirin, statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and, in many, β-blockers. Previous studies have highlighted the under-utilisation of secondary preventative strategies in this patient population. A focused review of secondary preventative medication at the time of revascularisation provides an excellent opportunity to ensure optimal use of these agents. Our aim was to identify the proportion of patients undergoing nonemergency surgical revascularisation discharged on these four secondary preventative medications.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care→Same topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes→French-language works237,207→