MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 90: Contemporary Use of Renin-Angiotensin System Blockers in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Findings from Get With The Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease Program

2012· article· en· W2521504831 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin R. Bainey, Gregg C. Fonarow, Christopher P. Cannon, Adrian F. Hernandez, Eric D. Peterson, W. Frank Peacock, Warren K. Laskey, Xin Zhao, Lee H. Schwamm, Deepak L. Bhatt

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineAcute coronary syndromeGuidelineCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial infarctionCardiologyObservational studyHeart failureDiabetes mellitusLogistic regressionAngiotensin-converting enzymeMedical prescriptionEmergency medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) initiated after myocardial infarction (MI) reduce mortality and are American College of Cardiology / American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline recommended. Yet, contemporary use of ACEI or ARB in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients at hospital discharge has not been well studied. Objective: To examine ACEI/ARB prescription based on current Class I guideline criteria, patient and hospital factors associated with use, and temporal trends in patients hospitalized with ACS. Methods: We performed an observational analysis of 80,241 patients admitted with an ACS and discharged home from 311 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines - Coronary Artery Disease Program from January 01 2005 to December 30 2009. Patient and hospital characteristics, measures and other outcomes were summarized descriptively by ACEI/ARB vs. no ACEI/ARB for ACC/AHA Class I indication. Pearson Chi-square test was used for categorical variables and Wilcoxon test was used for continuous variables. A multivariable logistic regression model with GEE method was fitted to identify influencing factors on ACEI/ARB use at discharge. Results: Among the 60,847 patients with an ACC/AHA Class I indication (left ventricular dysfunction or medical history of heart failure, hypertension or diabetes mellitus), 49,682 (81.7%) received ACEI/ARB with modest increase in treatment over the study period (76.7% to 84.6%). Patient and hospital factors independently associated with ACEI/ARB therapy use in patients meeting ACC/AHA Class I indication are shown in Table 1. Conclusion: Results from this large national registry suggest that one in five eligible patients hospitalized for ACS failed to receive ACC/AHA Class I guideline recommended ACEI/ARB therapy and use varies by patient factors. In particular, the low likelihood of ACEI/ARB post coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) raises concern. Thus, additional quality improvement efforts are warranted.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207