MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Right Ventricular Ejection Fraction on Outcomes in Chronic Systolic Heart Failure

2010· article· en· W2084160023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyEjection fractionInternal medicineHeart failureSystoleDiastoleBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Studies of the effect of right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) on outcomes in heart failure (HF) are limited by small sample size and short follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined the effect of baseline RVEF on outcomes in 2008 Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST) participants with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction <or=35% during 24 months of mean follow-up. RVEF, estimated by gated-equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography, was used to categorize patients into 4 RVEF groups: >or=40% (n=733), 30% to 39% (n=531), 20% to 29% (n=473), and <20% (n=271). Unadjusted rates for all-cause mortality in patients with RVEF >or=40%, 30% to 39%, 20% to 29%, and <20% were 27%, 32%, 35%, and 47%, respectively. When compared with patients with RVEF >or=40%, unadjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for all-cause mortality for those with RVEF 30% to 39%, 20% to 29%, and <20% were 1.19 (0.97 to 1.46; P=0.087), 1.45 (1.17 to 1.78; P=0.001), and 1.98 (1.59 to 2.47; P<0.0001), respectively. Respective multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for all-cause mortality associated with RVEF 30% to 39%, 20% to 29%, and <20% were 1.07 (0.87 to 1.32; P=0.518), 1.12 (0.89 to 1.40; P=0.328), and 1.32 (1.02 to 1.71; P=0.034), respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for other outcomes associated with RVEF <20% (compared with >or=40%) were as follows: cardiovascular mortality, 1.33 (1.01 to 1.76; P=0.041); HF mortality, 1.61 (1.03 to 2.52; P=0.037); sudden cardiac death, 1.29 (0.87 to 1.91; P=0.212); all-cause hospitalization, 1.21 (1.00 to 1.47; P=0.056); and HF hospitalization, 1.39 (1.10 to 1.77; P=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline RVEF <20% is a significant independent predictor of mortality and HF hospitalization in systolic HF.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.270 · 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