Time to presentation and 12-month health outcomes in patients presenting to the emergency department with symptoms of possible acute coronary syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To define the association between time taken to present to the emergency department (ED) with symptoms of possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and 1-year outcomes. We also determined whether particular patient characteristics are associated with delays in seeking care after symptom onset. METHODS: We collected data, which included a customised case report form to record symptom onset, on adult patients presenting with suspected ACS to two EDs in Australia and New Zealand. Such patients were followed up prospectively for 1 year. The composite primary endpoint included death, acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina pectoris treated with revascularisation or readmission with heart failure occurring after discharge but within 12 months after the index presentation. RESULTS: ACS was diagnosed at presentation in 420 (16.8%) of 2515 patients recruited. Cox regression was conducted to assess the relationship between presentation time and the rate of primary endpoints after controlling for age, ethnicity, prior angina, prior coronary artery bypass graft and index diagnosis. Middle (2-6 h) and late presenters (>6 h postsymptom onset) developed the primary endpoint at a rate 1.22 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.85) and 1.57 (1.07 to 2.31) times higher than early presenters. Patients with known risk factors and cardiovascular disease were more likely to present late to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: There is an independent association between time to presentation and 1-year cardiac outcomes following initial chest pain assessment for ED patients with possible cardiac chest pain in the Australian and New Zealand setting. This association occurred irrespective of the eventual diagnosis. Effective public health campaigns and other measures that facilitate early presentation with symptoms for patients with symptoms suggestive of ACS are justified and may improve prognosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12611001069943.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".