MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130443288

Redo coronary artery surgery; early and intermediate outcomes from a tertiary care hospital in a developing country.

2011· article· en· W2130443288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Syed Shahabuddin, Junaid Ansari, Muneer Amanullah, Shahid Ahmed Sami

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary bypassMyocardial infarctionUnstable anginaCoronary artery diseaseArteryAnginaSurgeryCardiologyCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyInternal medicineAortic cross-clampCardiac surgeryCoronary artery bypass surgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes of re-operative coronary artery surgery in a tertiary care hospital in a developing country. METHOD: Preoperative, intra-operative and postoperative variables were analyzed in 82 consecutive patients who underwent re-operative coronary surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass. RESULTS: The mean age was 63.3 +/- 7.7 years, 91.2% were male and 9.8% female. Coronary artery disease risk factors were present in more than 50% of the patients. History of preoperative myocardial infarction was positive in 56% patients. There was strong clinical and angiographic indication for surgery with unstable angina in 50% patients and > 80% had multivessel disease. Only 5% patients were in functional class I. The risk stratification showed a mean Euro score of 8. The IABP was used in 20% patients. A mean of 3.1 grafts per patient were applied. The median cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and aortic cross clamp time was 144 minutes respectively. Postoperative mortality was 7.3%. Short-term follow up revealed 74% of the patients in NYHA functional class I. CONCLUSION: Reoperative coronary artery bypass grafting is challenging but with expertise, team effort can be performed with good functional outcome.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCardiac and Coronary Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207