A Citywide Protocol for Primary PCI in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: If primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is performed promptly, the procedure is superior to fibrinolysis in restoring flow to the infarct-related artery in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The benchmark for a timely PCI intervention has become a door-to-balloon time of less than 90 minutes. Whether regional strategies can be developed to achieve this goal is uncertain. METHODS: We developed an integrated-metropolitan-area approach in which all patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were referred to a specialized center for primary PCI. We sought to determine whether there was a difference in door-to-balloon times between patients who were referred directly from the field by paramedics trained in the interpretation of electrocardiograms and patients who were referred by emergency department physicians. RESULTS: Between May 1, 2005, and April 30, 2006, a total of 344 consecutive patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were referred for primary PCI: 135 directly from the field and 209 from emergency departments. Primary PCI was performed in 93.6% of patients. The median door-to-balloon time was shorter in patients referred from the field (69 minutes; interquartile range, 43 to 87) than in patients needing interhospital transfer (123 minutes; interquartile range, 101 to 153; P<0.001). Door-to-balloon times of less than 90 minutes were achieved in 79.7% of patients who were transferred from the field and in 11.9% of those transferred from emergency departments (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Guideline door-to-balloon-times were more often achieved when trained paramedics independently triaged and transported patients directly to a designated primary PCI center than when patients were referred from emergency departments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.040 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.012 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".