MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P238: Long-Term Survival Trends in Hospitalized Heart Failure Patients

2012· article· en· W2256679648 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay G Smith, Selçuk Adabağ, Alan K. Berger, Russell V. Luepker

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsBerger (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionHeart failureProportional hazards modelHazard ratioInternal medicineContext (archaeology)Medical recordPopulationDiabetes mellitusSurvival analysisCardiologyConfidence intervalEndocrinologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Long-term survival data on patients with heart failure (HF) in community-based populations are limited. Preserved ejection fraction (PEF) is present in 50-60% of HF patients. We examined whether trends in long-term survival differed between HF patients with preserved (ejection fraction >/= 45) and reduced ejection fraction (REF) in the context of modern treatment. Methods: The Minnesota Heart Survey, a community-based population study conducted in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, abstracted a random sample of hospital records for patients aged 35-84 with a discharge diagnosis of HF in 1995 and 2000. In the absence of a gold standard diagnosis of HF, hospitalization records that met at least four of six published classification algorithm definitions were considered HF related. Mortality was ascertained from medical records and by linkage to death certificates from the Department of Health. Kaplan-Meier was used for unadjusted survival and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (HR). Results: In 1995 1269 HF patients (PEF, n = 423; REF, n = 846) and in 2000 1103 HF patients (PEF, n = 413; REF, n = 690) were identified. The prevalence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hyperlipidemia were significantly higher in 2000; the utilization of ACE-Inhibitors, beta-blockers and revascularization were also significantly greater in 2000. In 1995, the unadjusted 9-year survival was 21% in REF and 28% in PEF; in 2000 these numbers were 28% in REF and 29% in PEF (Figure). After adjustment for sex and age the HR for 9-year mortality in 1995 was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.68 - 0.89) for HF patients with PEF compared to REF, p = 0.0003; in 2000 the adjusted HR for 9-year mortality in patients with PEF compared to REF was 0.95 (95%CI: 0.82 - 1.10), p = 0.48. Conclusion: Survival after a HF related hospitalization is low with less than 30% of patients surviving nine years. The increased utilization of ACE-Inhibitors and beta-blockers may partially explain the improved survival among HF patients with REF.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→