MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2085947440 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017457

Dementia and Depression with Ischemic Heart Disease: A Population-Based Longitudinal Study Comparing Interventional Approaches to Medical Management

2011· article· en· W2085947440 on OpenAlexafffundabout
W. Alan C. Mutch, Randy Fransoo, Barry Campbell, Dan Château, Monica Sirski, R. Keith Warrian

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface HospitalHealth Sciences CentreManitoba HealthUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsDementiaDepression (economics)MedicineDiseaseDisease managementCardiologyPsychiatryIntensive care medicineGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We compared the proportion of ischemic heart disease (IHD) patients newly diagnosed with dementia and depression across three treatment groups: percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and medical management alone (IHD-medical). METHODS AND FINDINGS: De-identified, individual-level administrative records of health service use for the population of Manitoba, Canada (approximately 1.1 million) were examined. From April 1, 1993 to March 31, 1998, patients were identified with a diagnosis of IHD (ICD-9-CM codes). Index events of CABG or PCI were identified from April 1, 1998 to March 31, 2003. Outcomes were depression or dementia after the index event. Patients were followed forward to March 31, 2006 or until censored. Proportional hazards regression analysis was undertaken. Independent variables examined were age, sex, diabetes, hypertension and income quintile, medical management alone for IHD, or intervention by PCI or CABG. Age, sex, diabetes, and presence of hypertension were all strongly associated with the diagnosis of depression and dementia. There was no association with income quintile. Dementia was less frequent with PCI compared to medical management; (HR = 0.65; p = 0.017). CABG did not provide the same protective effect compared to medical management (HR = 0.90; p = 0.372). New diagnosis depression was more frequent with interventional approaches: PCI (n = 626; hazard ratio = 1.25; p = 0.028) and CABG (n = 1124, HR = 1.32; p = 0.0001) than non-interventional patients (n = 34,508). Subsequent CABG was nearly 16-fold higher (p<0.0001) and subsequent PCI was 22-fold higher (p<0.0001) for PCI-managed than CABG-managed patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients managed with PCI had the lowest likelihood of dementia-only 65% of the risk for medical management alone. Both interventional approaches were associated with a higher risk of new diagnosed depression compared to medical management. Long-term myocardial revascularization was superior with CABG. These findings suggest that PCI may confer a long-term protective effect from dementia. The mechanism(s) of dementia protection requires elucidation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.103 · 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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→