Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Question: Is a history of pre-existing atherothrombotic disease associated with an increased risk of subsequent ischemic events, and is it associated with a reduction in efficacy of clopidogrel? Population: Patients with recent ischemic stroke (IS), myocardial infarction (MI), or established peripheral arterial disease, and a history of pre-existing symptomatic atherothrombotic disease (IS and=or MI) were enrolled in the Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events (CAPRIE) trial. CAPRIE was a randomized, blinded, clinical trial comparing the efficacy of clopidogrel with aspirin in patients at risk of ischemic events. Design and methods: Retrospective, subgroup analysis of 4496 patients with a prior history of symptomatic atherothrombotic disease from the CAPRIE study. Results: Compared with the overall population of CAPRIE, patients with pre-existing symptomatic atherothrombotic disease have elevated rates of IS, MI, or vascular death. The 3-year rates of IS, MI, or vascular death were 20.4% with clopidogrel and 23.8% with aspirin (absolute risk reduction: 3.4%; 95% CI: -0.2 to 7.0; number needed to treat: 29; relative risk reduction: 14.9% (95% CI: 0.3 to 27.3; p = 0.045)). Conclusion: Patients with a history of previous symptomatic atherothrombotic disease suffer a high rate of subsequent ischemic events. Among these patients, the absolute risk reduction of clopidogrel over aspirin is greater compared with patients without pre-existing atherothrombotic disease.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 it