Efficacy and Safety of Huxin Formula in Patients after CABG: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial
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
BACKGROUND: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is widely used in the treatment of coronary artery disease. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Huxin Formula post CABG. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 270 inpatients with coronary heart disease participated in this study. CABG patients in the control group were treated with placebo, while patients in the experimental group were treated with Huxin Formula 1 week after the surgery. All patients were treated for 6 months and followed up for another 6 months. The main outcomes (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and readmission) were assessed 360 days after treatment, and secondary outcomes (frequency and scores of angina pectoris, etc.) were assessed 0, 90, 180, 270, and 360 days after treatment. RESULTS: Our results showed no significant difference between the 2 groups for the primary endpoints. In patients with cardiac function class II (New York Heart Association), the score of angina pectoris was significantly lower (3.88 ± 3.86 vs. 5.45 ± 3.59) and the frequency of angina pectoris attacks was less (0.96 ± 1.01 vs. 1.36 ± 0.94) after 90 days of treatment with Huxin Formula compared to placebo (p < 0.05). In patients with 3 coronary vessel lesions, the cardiac function class (1.14 ± 0.35 vs. 1.05 ± 0.21) after 360 days was significantly higher in the control group compared to the treatment group (p < 0.05). There were no obvious adverse reactions. CONCLUSION: Huxin Formula may improve cardiac function of patients with 3 coronary vessel lesions and relieve symptoms of patients with cardiac function class II but failed to show superiority in primary outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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