MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123215676 · doi:10.3109/14017431.2010.490593

Depression predicts perioperative outcomes following coronary artery bypass graft surgery

2010· article· en· W2123215676 on OpenAlexaff
Margarita Beresnevaitė, Rimantas Benetis, Graeme J. Taylor, Kristina Jurėnienė, Šarūnas Kinduris, Vilija Barauskienė

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Cardiovascular Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeCoronary artery bypass surgeryArteryDepression (economics)CardiologyCoronary artery diseaseSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To assess preoperative depression in middle-aged men undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and to determine if depression is related to perioperative outcomes. DESIGN: One hundred and nine middle-aged male patients were randomly selected and assessed for depression one day before CABG using the Symptom Checklist-90 Revised (SCL-90R). Perioperative outcomes were: (1) postoperative length of hospital stay, (2) the presence of any early complications (at intensive care unit), and (3) the presence of any late complications (at cardiac surgery unit). RESULTS: Twenty-five (23%) patients had a high level of depression. Preoperative depression scores significantly predicted postoperative length of hospital stay (p < 0.001) and the incidence of late perioperative complications (p < 0.05) independently from biomedical and sociodemographic factors. Each increase in depression T score increased the odds of occurrence of late complications by 10% (p = 0.018, CI 95% 1.02-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: Depression is common in middle-aged men undergoing CABG and is an independent predictor of postoperative length of hospital stay and late perioperative complications.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

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

Citations48
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Cardiovascular JournalSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207