Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Until recently, atherosclerosis was thought to be inexorably progressive. Beginning in 2001 and implemented in our vascular prevention clinics by 2003, we have been treating arteries rather than risk factors. We studied the proportion of patients with plaque progression vs regression before and after this change in paradigm. METHODS: Carotid total plaque area was measured by ultrasound at baseline and during follow-up. Before 2003, patients were treated according to consensus guidelines. After 2003, patients with plaque progression were treated more intensively, with the explicit goal of halting plaque progression or achieving regression. RESULTS: Four thousand three-hundred seventy-eight patients had serial plaque measurements in a given year between 1997 and 2007; 47% were female. Mean age at time of referral was 60 (SD, 15); this increased steeply (from age 50 to 62 years over the first 5 years) as we focused on stroke prevention. The annual rate of plaque progression increased steeply as the clinic populations aged but then abruptly decreased after implementation of the new approach to therapy. Before 2003, approximately half the patients had plaque progression and approximately 25% had regression; by 2005, this had reversed. Changes in plasma lipids show that the differences were attributable to plaque measurement, not simply more intensive therapy for all patients. By 2007, patients with progression had lower levels of low-density lipoprotein than those with regression. CONCLUSIONS: Treating arteries without measuring plaque would be like treating hypertension without measuring blood pressure. A clinical trial to test this approach is being designed.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".