Abstract P124: Perceived Stress in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Associations with Long-Term Health Status Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Chronic stress is associated with adverse prognosis in cardiovascular disease, but little is known about its link with health status. We studied the association between chronic stress and health status following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: In the 24 center US TRIUMPH registry, 4204 AMI patients completed the Perceived Stress Scale-4 (scores range 0-16) during hospitalization. Moderate/high stress over the prior month was defined as scores in the top 2 quintiles (scores=6-16). Patients were assessed at 1 year for disease-specific health status with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and for generic health status with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the SF-12. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the independent association between moderate/high stress and poor health status (defined as SAQ angina frequency <100; SAQ physical limitations <75; SAQ QOL <75; VAS <65; SF-12 physical <35; and SF-12 mental <45). Results: After extensive adjustment for demographic, socio-economic and clinical characteristics (including depressive symptoms), AMI patients with moderate/high stress had a greater likelihood of angina and poor disease-specific and generic health status (Figure; p<0.01 for all). Conclusion: Moderate/high stress at the time of an AMI is associated with poor post-AMI health status, even after adjustment for important confounders. Future studies need to examine whether stress mediates observed racial and socio-economic disparities, and whether novel interventions targeting chronic stress can improve post-AMI health status.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".