MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Incremental Prognostic Value of Cardiac Computed Tomography in Coronary Artery Disease Using CONFIRM

2011· article· en· W2548121913 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Imaging · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioEjection fractionCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineCardiologyConfidence intervalRevascularizationMyocardial infarctionHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Large multicenter studies validating the prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are lacking. We sought to confirm the independent and incremental prognostic value of coronary artery disease (CAD) severity measured using 64-slice CCTA over LVEF and clinical variables. METHODS AND RESULTS: A large international multicenter registry (CONFIRM Registry) was queried, and CCTA patients with LVEF data on CCTA were screened. Patients with a history of myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or cardiac transplantation were excluded. The National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III risk was calculated for each patient, and CCTA was evaluated for CAD severity (normal, nonobstructive, non-high-risk, or high-risk CAD) and LVEF <50%. Patients were followed for an end point of all-cause mortality; 27 125 patients underwent CCTA at 12 participating centers, with a total of 14 064 patients meeting the analysis criteria. Follow-up was available for 13 966 (99.3%) patients (mean follow-up of 22.5 months; 95% confidence interval, 22.3 to 22.7 months). All-cause mortality (271 deaths) occurred in 0.65% of patients without coronary atherosclerosis, 1.99% of patients with nonobstructive CAD, 2.90% of patients with non-high-risk CAD, and 4.95% for patients with high-risk CAD. Multivariable analysis confirmed that LVEF <50% (hazard ratio, 2.74; 95% confidence interval, 2.12 to 3.51) and CAD severity (hazard ratio,1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.42 to 1.76) were predictors of all-cause mortality, and CAD severity had incremental value over LVEF and clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that CCTA measures of CAD severity and LVEF have independent prognostic value. Incorporation of CAD severity provides incremental value for predicting all-cause death over routine clinical predictors and LVEF in patients with suspected obstructive CAD.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.219 · 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