MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323009013 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000002002

Efficacy of Enhanced External Counterpulsation in Patients With Chronic Refractory Angina on Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Angina Class

2015· review· en· W2323009013 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chunmei Zhang, Xiangjuan Liu, Xiaomeng Wang, Qi Wang, Yun Zhang, Zhiming Ge

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyInternal medicineAnginaMeta-analysisConfidence intervalCardiologyCoronary artery diseaseSubgroup analysisRevascularizationHeart failureMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing number of patients with chronic artery disease suffer from angina, despite the optimal medical management (ie, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and long-acting nitrates) and revascularization. Currently, enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP) therapy has been verified as a noninvasive, safe therapy for refractory angina. The study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of EECP in patients with chronic refractory angina according to Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina class.We identified systematic literature through MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Clinical Trials Register Database, and the ClinicalTrials. gov Website from 1990 to 2015. Studies were considered eligible if they were prospective and reported data on CCS class before and after EECP treatment. Meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of EECP therapy by at least 1 CCS angina class improvement, and proportion along with the 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. Statistical heterogeneity was calculated by I statistic and the Q statistic. Sensitivity analysis was addressed to test the influence of trials on the overall pooled results. Subgroup analysis was applied to explore potential reasons for heterogeneity.Eighteen studies were enrolled in our meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed 85% of patients underwent EECP had a reduction by at least one CCS class (95%CI 0.81-0.88, I = 58.5%, P < 0.001). The proportion of patients enrolled at primarily different studies with chronic heart failure (CHF) improved by at least 1 CCS class was about 84% after EECP (95%CI 0.81-0.88, I = 32.7%, P = 0.1668). After 3 large studies were excluded, the pooled proportion was 82% (95%CI 0.79-0.86, I = 18%, P = 0.2528). Funnel plot indicated that some asymmetry while the Begg and Egger bias statistic showed no publication bias (P = 0.1495 and 0.2859, respectively).Our study confirmed that EECP provided an effective treatment for patients who were unresponsive to medical management and/or invasive therapy. However, the long-term benefits of EECP therapy needed further studies to evaluate in the management of chronic refractory angina.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207