[Exercise tolerance after coronary stenting in patients with stable angina].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The target of our investigation was to evaluate the exercise tolerance in patients with stable angina 18 months after coronary stenting. The 165 patients with stable angina were included in research. The main group consisted of 100 patients who underwent PTCA with stenting. Control group was composed of the 65 patients who underwent conservative therapy. 73 (73%) patients of the main group and 49 (75.4%) patients of the control group had angina of III-IV functional class. Comparison of long-term results revealed that the tolerance to exercise stress in control group was considerably lower - 4.35MET than in main group - 8.58MET (p<0.05). The duration of continuous exercise stress test in control group was 7.5 min; in main group - 12.4 min. The criteria for exercise stress test discontinuation were anginous pain and/or ischemic ECG changes - 72.3%; the submaximal level of heart rate was rare - 7.7% (p<0.05). The authors conclude that the coronary stenting could significantly improve quality of life due to increase of exercise tolerance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".