Canada Acute Coronary Syndrome Score: A Preprocedural Risk Score for Contrast-Induced Nephropathy After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is a serious complication associated with poor outcomes. We assessed the predictive value of the Canada Acute Coronary Syndrome (C-ACS) score for CIN in these patients. A total of 394 consecutive patients with STEMI were enrolled and divided into 3 groups according to their C-ACS scores-group 1, score 0; group 2, score 1; and group 3, score ≥2. The clinical outcomes were CIN and major adverse clinical events (MACEs) during hospital and follow-up; 8.4% of patients developed CIN. Patients with high C-ACS scores were more likely to develop CIN, in-hospital death, and MACEs ( P < .001). The C-ACS score was an independent predictor of CIN (odds ratio = 2.87; 95% confidence interval = 1.78-4.63; P < .001) and risk factor for long-term MACEs. The C-ACS score had good predictive values for CIN, in-hospital morality, MACEs, and long-term mortality. Patients with high C-ACS risk scores exhibited a worse survival rate than those with low scores (death, P = .02; MACEs, P = .006). In conclusion, in patients with STEMI, the C-ACS could predict CIN and clinical outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it