A Comparison of the NYHA Classification and the Duke Treadmill Score in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: A discussion of the measurement of functional status in cardiovascular research. Background: Selection of appropriate outcome measures and instrumentation is vital for nurse researchers to ensure that outcomes align conceptually and are measured using reliable and valid tools. Functional status is a well-known outcome in cardiovascular research—however attention to underlying conceptual differences that may influence choices of whether to include subjective or objective measures is needed. Design: This work is a discussion paper: seminal research reporting the development, validation, and reliability testing of the NYHA classification system and the Duke Treadmill Score. Implications for nursing: Conceptually clarity and comprehensive appraisal of the reliability and validity of outcome measures in nursing research are essential to ensure high level of quality outcomes that will benefit patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it