Cardiovascular outcomes among sildenafil users: results of the International Men’s Health Study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To assess the incidence of serious cardiovascular disease (CVD) events [i.e. myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke] and all-cause mortality in men with erectile dysfunction (ED) who received prescriptions for sildenafil. METHODS: The International Men's Health Study (IMHS) was a prospective, observational cohort study of patients with ED and a new or existing prescription for sildenafil. Baseline and follow-up questionnaires provided information on demographics, CVD risk factors and ED. Postevent questionnaires were mailed to patients following possible nonfatal CVD events to collect information related to exposure to sildenafil/ED treatments before the event. RESULTS: Thirty-five CVD events were reported in 30 patients in the analysis set (n = 3813). The incidence of all-cause mortality, MI and stroke was 0.4, 0.6 and 0.1 per 100 patient-years of observation respectively. Among the six men who reported using sildenafil in the month before a nonfatal CVD event, two reported use in the 24 h before the event. CONCLUSION: The results of the IMHS support previous reports that ED and CVD are often comorbid and share risk factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it