MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099419442 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/sup025

Vascular protection: telmisartan in the ONTARGET Trial Programme

2009· article· en· W2099419442 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

VenueEuropean Heart Journal Supplements · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRamiprilTelmisartanMedicineClinical endpointInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionCardiologyStroke (engine)Randomized controlled trialBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ONTARGET Trial Programme includes the ONTARGET and TRANSCEND studies. In both studies, participants were at high cardiovascular risk because they had vascular disease without heart failure, or diabetes with end-organ damage. Participants also received proven therapies for cardiovascular risk reduction. In ONTARGET, telmisartan 80 mg was compared with ramipril 10 mg, and the combination of telmisartan and ramipril was compared with ramipril alone. Telmisartan was as effective as ramipril on the primary outcome and other cardiovascular events and was better tolerated, with fewer treatment discontinuations. In TRANSCEND, telmisartan and placebo, both added to background therapy, were compared in high-risk patients intolerant to angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitors. There was a lower incidence of cardiovascular events than assumed in power calculations probably due to higher use of background therapy than expected based upon the HOPE trial. This may explain why the reduction in the primary outcome associated with telmisartan was not statistically significant. Nevertheless, the results of TRANSCEND were consistent with the outcome of the HOPE trial, and the secondary endpoint in TRANSCEND, which was equal to the HOPE primary endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke), was indeed significant. Telmisartan plus ramipril did not reduce the primary outcome compared with ramipril alone and was associated with a greater likelihood of adverse events. The combination is not recommended for the prevention of cardiovascular events in this patient population. In summary, telmisartan was as effective as ramipril on major vascular events in high-risk patients in ONTARGET but showed a non-significant benefit in TRANSCEND. In both studies, the lower rate of treatment discontinuations with telmisartan is important life-long adherence to therapy.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.221 · 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