MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081710182 · doi:10.1097/hco.0b013e3283229afb

The role of statins in chronic heart failure

2009· review· en· W2081710182 on OpenAlexaff
Mouhannad M. Sadek, Haissam Haddad

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Cardiology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRosuvastatinHeart failureInternal medicineCardiologyPost-hoc analysisRandomized controlled trialStatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss unresolved issues and recent findings regarding the use of statins in heart failure. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent data from Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto miocardico--Heart Failure and Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure suggest that statins did not have any effect on outcome despite significant reduction in low-density lipoprotein and high sensitivity C-reactive protein. SUMMARY: Most of the evidence for the use of statins in heart failure originates from retrospective trials and post-hoc analyses, and is not supported by prospective randomized clinical trials. There is no evidence to support initiating statin therapy in patients with symptomatic New York Heart Association II-IV heart failure, regardless of the cause.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in CardiologySame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207