MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074985728 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.090917

The Enhancing Secondary Prevention in Coronary Artery Disease trial

2009· article· en· W2074985728 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Finlay A. McAlister, Miriam Fradette, Sumit R. Majumdar, R. Williams, Michael M. Graham, James McMeekin, W. A. Ghali, Ross T. Tsuyuki, Merril L. Knudtson, Jeremy Grimshaw

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of AlbertaFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of OttawaRoyal Alexandra Hospital
FundersEli Lilly CanadaFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleW. Garfield Weston FoundationBoston Scientific CorporationPfizerHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaPfizer CanadaSanofiAlberta Heritage Foundation for Medical ResearchUniversity of AlbertaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicineStatinCoronary artery diseaseGuidelineRandomized controlled trialOdds ratioInternal medicineCardiac catheterizationClinical endpointPhysical therapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Proven efficacious therapies are sometimes underused in patients with chronic cardiac conditions, resulting in suboptimal outcomes. We evaluated whether evidence summaries, which were either unsigned or signed by local opinion leaders, improved the quality of secondary prevention care delivered by primary care physicians of patients with coronary artery disease. METHODS: We performed a randomized trial, clustered at the level of the primary care physician, with 3 study arms: control, unsigned statements or opinion leader statements. The statements were faxed to primary care physicians of adults with coronary artery disease at the time of elective cardiac catheterization. The primary outcome was improvement in statin management (initiation or dose increase) 6 months after catheterization. RESULTS: We enrolled 480 adults from 252 practices. Although statin use was high at baseline (n=316 [66%]), most patients were taking a low dose (mean 32% of the guideline-recommended dose), and their low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels were elevated (mean 3.09 mmol/L). Six months after catheterization, statin management had improved in 79 of 157 patients (50%) in the control arm, 85 of 158 (54%) patients in the unsigned statement group (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.18, 95% CI 0.71-1.94, p=0.52) and 99 of 165 (60%) patients in the opinion leader statement group (adjusted OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.94-2.42, p=0.09). The mean fasting LDL cholesterol levels after 6 months were similar in all 3 study arms: 2.35 (standard deviation [SD] 0.86) mmol/L in the control arm compared with 2.24 (SD 0.73) among those in the opinion leader group (p=0.48) and 2.19 (SD 0.68) in the unsigned statement group (p=0.32). INTERPRETATION: Faxed evidence reminders for primary care physicians, even when endorsed by local opinion leaders, were insufficient to optimize the quality of care for adults with coronary artery disease. ClinicalTrials.gov trial register no. NCT00175240.

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)0.003
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations30
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207