MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591991669 · doi:10.1002/ccd.26977

Clinical presentation of patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection

2017· article· en· W2591991669 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christina Luong, Andrew Starovoytov, Milad Heydari, Tara Sedlak, Eve Aymong, Jacqueline Saw

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScadChest painMyocardial infarctionNauseaEmergency departmentVomitingAcute coronary syndromeInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an infrequent but important cause of myocardial infarction (MI) especially in younger women. However, the clinical presentation and the acuity of symptoms prompting invasive management in SCAD patients have not been described. Understanding these presenting features may improve SCAD diagnosis and management. METHODS: We reviewed SCAD patients who were prospectively followed at the Vancouver General Hospital SCAD Clinic. Their presenting symptoms and unstable features were obtained from detailed clinical histories and hospital admission documentation. Baseline characteristics, predisposing and precipitating conditions, angiographic findings, management strategies, in-hospital, and long-term events were recorded prospectively. RESULTS: We included 196 SCAD patients who had complete documentation of their presenting symptoms. The majority were women (178/196; 90.8%) and all presented with MI (24.0% STEMI). The most frequent presenting symptom was chest discomfort, reported by 96%. Other symptoms included arm pain (49.5%), neck pain (22.1%), nausea or vomiting (23.4%), diaphoresis (20.9%), dyspnea (19.3%), and back pain (12.2%). Ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation occurred in 8.1% (16/196), with 1.0% having cardiac arrest. The time from symptom onset to hospital presentation was 1.1 ± 3.0 days. NSTEMI patients had longer delay for coronary angiography compared with STEMI (2.0 ± 2.5 days vs. 0.8 ± 1.7 days, P = 0.002). Overall, 34.2% had unstable symptoms upon arrival for coronary angiography. Those with unstable symptoms were more likely to undergo repeat angiography (65.7% vs. 50.4%, P = 0.049), and repeat or unplanned revascularization (14.9% vs. 5.4%, P = 0.033) during acute hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Chest discomfort was the most frequent presenting symptom with SCAD and one-third had unstable symptoms prompting urgent invasive angiography. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations105
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207