MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2207827162 · doi:10.14740/cr448e

A Case Report of Recurrent Subacute Stent Thrombosis After Drug Eluting Stent Implantation: What Is the Real Reason?

2015· article· en· W2207827162 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shiwei Yang, Yujie Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBeijing Nova ProgramBeijing Municipal Administration of HospitalsBeijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals Clinical Medicine Development of Special Funding SupportNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous coronary interventionConventional PCIClopidogrelCardiologyStentDrug-eluting stentInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionDissection (medical)ThrombosisCardiac catheterizationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 63-year-old male was admitted with subacute anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Cardiac catheterization revealed a subtotal occlusion in the proximal and middle part of left anterior descending coronary artery. Subacute stent thrombosis (SAT) occurred recurrently until the last stent deployment solved the problem of the uncovered artery and distal-stent edge dissection. The patient's SYNTAX score was 19, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed. Unfortunately, SAT occurred recurrently after drug eluting stent implantation. What reason should be responsible for the recurrent SAT, clopidogrel hyporesponse or mechanical factors? All anti-platelet therapy has been tried, but adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation remained hyporesponsive to clopidogrel. The patient has been symptom-free at follow-ups since the fourth PCI solved the problem of the uncovered artery and distal-stent edge dissection.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0110.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology ResearchSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207