MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122746645 · doi:10.1002/clc.20445

Elevated Serum Cardiac Troponin in Non‐acute Coronary Syndrome

2009· review· en· W2122746645 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

VenueClinical Cardiology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsBrandon Regional Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTroponinAcute coronary syndromeTroponin complexInternal medicineCardiologyTroponin ITroponin TIntensive care medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac troponins (CTn) are the most sensitive and specific biochemical markers of myocardial injury and risk stratification. The assay for troponin T (cTnI) is standardized, and results obtained from different institutions are comparable. This is not the case with troponin I (cTnT), and clinicians should be aware that each institution must analyze and standardize its own results. Elevated cTn levels indicate cardiac injury, but do not define the mechanical injury. The differentiation of cTn elevation caused by coronary events from those not related to an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is tiresome, at times vexing, and often costly. Elevation of cTn in non-ACS is a marker of increased cardiac and all-cause morbidity and mortality. The cause of these elevations may involve serious medical conditions that require meticulous diagnostic evaluation and aggressive therapy. At present, there are no guidelines to treat patients with elevated troponin levels and no coronary disease. The current strategy of treatment of patients with elevated troponin and non-ACS involves treating the underlying causes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.355 · 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