MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127582431 · doi:10.1136/bmj.38603.656076.63

Risk score for predicting death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients with stable angina, based on a large randomised trial cohort of patients

2005· article· en· W2127582431 on OpenAlex
Tim Clayton, Jacobus Lubsen, Stuart Pocock, Zoltán Vokó, Bridget‐Anne Kirwan, Keith A.A. Fox, Philip A. Poole‐Wilson

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineStroke (engine)CardiologyAnginaFramingham Risk ScoreEjection fractionUnstable anginaInfarctionHeart failureDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To derive a risk score for the combination of death from all causes, myocardial infarction, and disabling stroke in patients with stable symptomatic angina who require treatment for angina and have preserved left ventricular function. DESIGN: Multivariate Cox regression analysis of data from a large multicentre trial. SETTING: Outpatient cardiology clinics in western Europe, Israel, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: 7311 patients with all required data available. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Death from any cause or myocardial infarction or disabling stroke during a mean follow-up of 4.9 years. RESULTS: 1063 patients either died from any cause or sustained myocardial infarction or disabling stroke. The five year risk of this composite ranged from 4% for patients in the lowest tenth of risk to 35% for patients in the highest tenth. The risk score combines 16 routinely available clinical variables (in order of decreasing contribution): age, left ventricular ejection fraction, smoking, white blood cell count, diabetes, casual blood glucose concentration, creatinine concentration, previous stroke, at least one angina attack a week, coronary angiographic findings (if available), lipid lowering treatment, QT interval, systolic blood pressure > or = 155 mm Hg, number of drugs used for angina, previous myocardial infarction, and sex. Fitting the same model separately to all cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke gave similar results. The risk score did not seem to predict the nature of the event (death in 39%, myocardial infarction in 46%, and disabling stroke in 15%) or the incidence of angiography or revascularisation, which occurred in 29% of patients. CONCLUSION: This risk score is an objective aid in deciding on further management of patients with stable angina with the aim of reducing serious outcome events. The score can also be used in planning future trials.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · 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