MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332150493 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0b013e3283632f07

Perioperative cardiac biomarkers

2013· review· en· W2332150493 on OpenAlexaff
W. Scott Beattie, Duminda N. Wijeysundera

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeIntensive care medicineRisk stratificationPsychological interventionMyocardial infarctionBiomarkerTroponinRisk assessmentMEDLINEInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We presume that biomarkers will improve identification of patients at risk, leading to interventions and treatments that reduce perioperative adverse events. Risk stratification is multifactorial, and a biomarker must add information to this process, thereby redistributing patients to either higher or lower risk categories, to improve the allocation of expensive and risky interventions. This review focuses on the utility of three cardiac biomarkers in perioperative management. RECENT FINDINGS: Using newly defined epidemiologic criteria, three distinct molecules, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), troponin (cTn), and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) emerge as potentially useful in perioperative medicine. A meta-analysis shows, in vascular surgery, BNP improves risk stratification. Four articles highlight the utility of postoperative cTn measurements in cases of myocardial injury. These articles show that most injury is not infarction, and they present preliminary evidence of the populations that will benefit from structured surveillance protocols. HbA1c is shown to improve the prediction of mortality, but there are questions whether this risk is modifiable. SUMMARY: The findings here suggest an expanded role for postoperative cTn surveillance; however, the precise populations that benefit, or the interventions required, are not yet defined. The encouraging data for the other two biomarkers need more investigations before adopting them into routine clinical use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.240
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Critical CareSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207