MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2443840288 · doi:10.1161/jaha.116.004080

Angina and Future Cardiovascular Events in Stable Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry

2016· article· en· W2443840288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alon Eisen, Deepak L. Bhatt, Philippe Gabríel Steg, Kim A. Eagle, Shinya Goto, E. Magnus Ohman, Benjamin M. Scirica

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyHazard ratioAnginaMyocardial infarctionCoronary artery diseaseUnstable anginaOdds ratioHeart failureRevascularizationStroke (engine)Proportional hazards modelCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The extent to which angina is associated with future cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease has long been debated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Included were outpatients with established coronary artery disease who were enrolled in the REACH registry and were followed for 4 years. Angina at baseline was defined as necessitating episodic or permanent antianginal treatment. The primary end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary end points included heart failure, cardiovascular hospitalizations, and coronary revascularization. The independent association between angina and first/total events was examined using Cox and logistic regression models. Out of 26 159 patients with established coronary artery disease, 13 619 (52%) had angina at baseline. Compared with patients without angina, patients with angina were more likely to be older, female, and had more heart failure and polyvascular disease (P<0.001 for each). Compared with patients without angina, patients with angina had higher rates of first primary end-point event (14.2% versus 16.3%, unadjusted hazard ratio 1.19, CI 1.11-1.27, P<0.001; adjusted hazard ratio 1.06, CI 0.99-1.14, P=0.11), and total primary end-point events (adjusted risk ratio 1.08, CI 1.01-1.16, P=0.03). Patients with angina were at increased risk for heart failure (adjusted odds ratio 1.17, CI 1.06-1.28, P=0.002), cardiovascular hospitalizations (adjusted odds ratio 1.29, CI 1.21-1.38, P<0.001), and coronary revascularization (adjusted odds ratio 1.23, CI 1.13-1.34, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and angina have higher rates of future cardiovascular events compared with patients without angina. After adjustment, angina was only weakly associated with cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, but significantly associated with heart failure, cardiovascular hospitalization, and coronary revascularization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations81
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart AssociationSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207