Seasonal congestive heart failure mortality and hospitalisation trends, Quebec 1990–1998: Figure 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To describe seasonal congestive heart failure (CHF) mortality and hospitalisations in Quebec, Canada between 1990-1998 and compare trends in CHF mortality and morbidity with those in France. DESIGN: Population cohort study. SETTING: Province of Quebec, Canada. PATIENTS: Mortality data were obtained from the Quebec Death Certificate Registry and hospitalisation from the Quebec Med-Echo hospital discharge database. Cases with primary ICD-9 code 428 were considered cases of CHF. RESULTS: Monthly CHF mortality was higher in January, declined until September and then rose steadily (p<0.05). Hospital admissions for CHF declined from May until September (moving averages analysis p<0.0001). Seasonal mortality patterns observed in Quebec were similar to those observed in France. CONCLUSION: CHF mortality in Quebec is highest during the winter and declines in the summer, similar to observations in France and Scotland. This suggests that absolute temperatures may not necessarily be that important but increased CHF mortality is observed once environmental temperatures fall below a certain "threshold" temperature. Alternatively better internal heating and warmer clothing required for survival in Quebec may ameliorate mortality patterns despite colder external environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".