MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 175: Evaluation of 30-day Mortality in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Across All Hospital Centers Performing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PPCI) in Quebec, Canada

2013· article· en· W2503600873 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laurie Lambert, Yongling Xiao, Stéphane Rinfret, Simon Kouz, Philippe L. L’Allier, Eli Segal, Dave Ross, Alain Vanasse, Sébastien Maire, Jim Nasmith, Peter Bogaty

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversité de SherbrookeJewish General HospitalMontreal Heart InstituteCegep regional de LanaudiereCégep de LévisInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecSanté MontérégieInstitut National d'Excellence en Santé et en Services Sociaux
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGeeMyocardial infarctionPercutaneous coronary interventionTIMIReperfusion therapyCardiogenic shockMortality rateEmergency medicineInternal medicineGeneralized estimating equationCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: PPCI is the predominant reperfusion treatment for STEMI in Quebec, Canada. Our systematic field evaluation, during a 6-month period in 2008-9, provided the opportunity to compare patient characteristics, processes of care and 30-day mortality across Quebec’s 13 PPCI centers. METHODS: All STEMI patients, who either presented directly or were transferred to one of these 13 PPCI centers, were included in the analyses. Patients transferred after fibrinolytic treatment were excluded. Since patient outcomes within the same hospital may be correlated, generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were used to compare 30-day mortality across centers, adjusting for patient-level risk factors (sex, TIMI index, anterior myocardial infarction, history of heart failure/shock) and for hospital-level characteristics. RESULTS: The majority of patients treated in the 13 PPCI centers were transferred for PPCI from non-tertiary centers (n=785, 62%), and these patients were unlikely to receive timely treatment (i.e., only 26% with first door-to-device time ≤90 min). Of the remaining 490 (38%) patients who presented directly to a PPCI center, 70% had timely treatment. Across the 13 PPCI centers, crude 30-day mortality varied widely (1.5% - 16.3%) and variation persisted after adjustment for patient risk factors (2.1% - 11.2%). STEMI volume per PPCI center and the presence of cardiac surgery on-site were not associated with 30-day mortality. In the final GEE model containing all patient factors considered and 3 hospital-level factors (proportion of patients treated with a radial approach, proportion of patients transferred for PPCI, proportion of patients with timely PPCI), the odds ratio for death decreased by 18% for every 20% increase in the proportion of patients treated with a radial approach, and decreased by 25% for every 20% increase in the proportion of patients with timely PPCI. Conversely, the odds ratio increased by 28% for every 20% increase in the proportion of transferred patients. CONCLUSION: Thirty-day STEMI mortality can vary substantially across PPCI centers within a complete system of care. Our findings suggest that 30-day STEMI mortality could be reduced if PPCI centers discouraged transfers with expected untimely delays.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207