MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097443249 · doi:10.1136/heart.84.2.142

The impact of time to thrombolytic treatment on outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction

2000· article· en· W2097443249 on OpenAlexaff
Panithaya Chareonthaitawee

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsHamilton General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrombolysisMedicineMyocardial infarctionEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineVentricleMortality rateInfarctionHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To examine the impact of time to thrombolytic treatment on multiple acute outcome variables in a single trial of thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: Mortality and reinfarction rate were measured in 2770 patients with acute myocardial infarction who received thrombolysis within 12 hours in CORE, an international, dose ranging trial of poloxamer 188. Tc-99m sestamibi infarct size and radionuclide angiographic ejection fraction substudies included 1099 and 1074 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Time to thrombolysis, subgrouped by intervals (< 2, 2-4, > or = 4-6, and > or = 6 hours), was significantly associated with infarct size (median 15.0%, 18.5%, 22.0%, 18.5% of left ventricle; p = 0.033), mean (SD) ejection fraction (51.5 (12.0)%, 48. 3 (13.9)%, 48.2 (13.3)%, 48.2 (15.0)%; p = 0.006), 35 day mortality (5.7%, 7.1%, 7.9%, 12.5%; p = 0.0004), six month mortality (7.3%, 8. 6%, 10.4%, 15.5%; p < 0.0001), and 35 day reinfarction rate (6.1%, 3. 2%, 4.0%, 0.9%; p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this single large trial, the beneficial effect of time to thrombolysis on infarct size and ejection fraction was restricted to treatment given within two hours of symptom onset, while the effect on mortality was evident over all time intervals. Reinfarction rate was higher in patients treated with earlier thrombolysis.

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)0.018
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations66
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeartSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207