MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112599808 · doi:10.1148/radiol.14122816

Left Ventricular Function and Volume with Coronary CT Angiography Improves Risk Stratification and Identification of Patients at Risk for Incident Mortality: Results from 7758 Patients in the Prospective Multinational CONFIRM Observational Cohort Study

2014· article· en· W2112599808 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Arsanjani, Daniel S. Berman, Heidi Gransar, Victor Cheng, Allison Dunning, Fay Y. Lin, Stephan Achenbach, Mouaz H. Al‐Mallah, Matthew J. Budoff, Tracy Q. Callister, Hyuk‐Jae Chang, Filippo Cademartiri, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Augustin DeLago, Martin Hadamitzky, Jöerg Hausleiter, Philipp A. Kaufmann, Troy LaBounty, Jonathon Leipsic, Gilbert Raff, Leslee J. Shaw, Todd C. Villines, Ricardo C. Cury, Gudrun Feuchtner, Yong-Jin Kim, James K. Min

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionHazard ratioCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseProportional hazards modelProspective cohort studyConfidence intervalHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To assess whether gradations of left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) and volumes measured with coronary computed tomography (CT) would augment risk stratification and discrimination for incident mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was approved by the institutional review board, and informed consent was obtained when required. Subjects without known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent cardiac CT angiography with quantitative LV measurements were categorized according to LVEF (≥ 55%, 45%-54.9%, 35%-44.9%, or <35%). LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) and LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) were classified as normal (≥ 90 mL) or abnormal (≥ 200 mL). CAD extent and severity was categorized as none, nonobstructive, obstructive (≥ 50%), one-vessel, two-vessel, and three-vessel or left main disease. LVEF and volumes were assessed for risk prediction and discrimination of future mortality by using Cox hazards model and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, respectively. RESULTS: During a follow-up of 2.0 years ± 0.9, 7758 patients (mean age, 58.5 years ± 13.0; 4220 male patients [54.4%]) were studied. At multivariable analysis, worsening LVEF was independently associated with mortality for moderately (hazard ratio = 3.14, P < .001) and severely (hazard ratio = 5.19, P < .001) abnormal ejection fraction. LVEF demonstrated improved discrimination for mortality (Az = 0.816) when compared with CAD risk factors alone (Az = 0.781) or CAD risk factors plus extent and severity. At multivariable analysis of a subgroup of 3706 individuals, abnormal LVEDV (hazard ratio = 4.02) and LVESV (hazard ratio = 6.46) helped predict mortality (P < .001). Similarly, LVESV and LVEDV demonstrated improved discrimination when compared with CAD risk factors or CAD extent and severity (P < .05). CONCLUSION: LV dysfunction and volumes measured with cardiac CT angiography augment risk prediction and discrimination for future mortality.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations36
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207