Outcome of patients with acute coronary syndromes enrolled in clinical trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate in-hospital and 1-year outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) enrolled in clinical studies. Among patients included in the Canadian ACS Registries, patients enrolled in clinical studies (n = 883, 13.4%) were compared with patients who were not enrolled. Enrolled patients were younger, more likely to be smokers, had less diabetes, less hypertension, less previous myocardial infarction, and less previous percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting. Enrollment in clinical studies was higher in patients with ST-elevation and ST-depression ACS. Furthermore, patients enrolled had more coronary interventions (percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting) and received more evidence-based therapies such as aspirin and statins. Unadjusted event rates were significantly higher in patients not enrolled in clinical studies: in-hospital death 2.4 versus 1.1% (P = 0.02), and 1-year death 9.2 versus 6.1% (P = 0.003), and death or myocardial infarction 16.1 versus 13.8% (P = 0.09). After multivariable analysis, enrollment in clinical studies showed a trend towards decreased in-hospital and 1-year death. Patients with ACS in Canada who participate in clinical studies are more likely to receive evidence-based therapies and interventions throughout hospitalization. After multivariable analysis, enrollment in a clinical trial may also contribute to better in-hospital and 1-year outcome.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".