Abstract 11299: Economic Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy versus Optimal Medical Therapy in Mild Heart Failure: Long-Term Follow-Up and Projections From REVERSE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The REVERSE Study, a prospective double-blinded randomized trial, assessed whether or not Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) together with Optimal Medical Therapy (OMT) limited the progression of Heart Failure (HF) compared to OMT alone in Class I/II HF subjects with QRS ≥120 ms and LVEF ≤40%. Patients were implanted with CRT (either with pacing capabilities only “CRT-P”, or combined with a defibrillator “CRT-D”) and randomized to CRT-ON or CRT-OFF. CRT-OFF patients were unblinded after 12 (US/Canada) or 24 months (Europe) and crossed-over to CRT-ON with pre-planned follow-up for 5 years. Our analysis investigates the cost-effectiveness of CRT in this cohort. METHODS: Outcomes were modeled using regression-based techniques informed by actual 5 year data; Cost-Effectiveness for both CRT-ON vs. CRT-OFF and CRT-D vs. CRT-P were assessed. Co-variables used in all analyses were QRS Duration, Ischemic Etiology, LBBB, Gender and Age. NYHA Class based mortality as well as advanced statistical met...
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 | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".