MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 13594: Impact on Clinical Outcomes of Randomization at Community Hospitals Versus Pre-hospital location in STEMI Patients: Insights From the STREAM Study

2015· article· en· W2611933576 on OpenAlexaff
Robert C. Welsh, Patrick Goldstein, António Carvalho, Miodrag Ostojić, John N. Nanas, Yinggan Zheng, Anthony Gershlick, Thierry Danays, Frans Van de Werf, Paul W. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTIMIConventional PCIFibrinolysisInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionRandomizationClinical endpointKillip classCardiologyThrombolysisRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The STREAM study randomized STEMI pts <3 hrs from symptom onset to primary PCI (pPCI) or a fibrinolysis pharmacoinvasive approach (PI) with rescue for failed fibrinolysis and scheduled angiography for the remainder within 24h. Although most pts were randomized pre-hospital (PH) and admitted to pPCI centres, selected community hospitals (CH) within STEMI networks also participated. Given the inherent delays with inter-hospital transfer, we examined outcomes accordingly to randomization location. Methods: CH pts 358/1866 (19.2%) were compared to PH pts. Results are further categorized according to pts receiving pPCI, PI rescue, PI with scheduled angiography (%’s and medians with 25th-75th percentiles). Results: Overall compared to PH, CH pts had more diabetes (17.8% vs. 11.5%, p=0.001), higher Killip Class >1 (9.4% vs. 5.0%, p=0.002) and TIMI Risk Score ≥5 (18.2% vs. 12.4%, p=0.005). 30-day primary composite endpoint (death, CHF, shock, re-infarction) for CH was 14.9% vs. PH 13.2% (p=0.403). PI pts within CH received less rescue PCI than PH pts (35.1% vs. 42.8%, p=0.062) (table) and it was delayed by approximately 43 min. CH pts undergoing pPCI also had an approximate 31 min delay. After adjusting for TIMI risk score and time from symptom onset, CH pts requiring rescue had worse outcomes compared to PH (OR 2.3, 95% CI, 1.2-4.6); However no difference in outcomes existed between CH and PH pts in those undergoing pPCI (p interaction=0.027). PI pts receiving scheduled cath from CH and PH had comparable times to cath (17.7 vs. 18.7 hours) and low primary composite event rates (6.2% vs 8.0%). Conclusion: Within STREAM CH pts had higher baseline risk but overall similar outcomes to those randomized PH. Despite higher baseline risk, CH pts with successful fibrinolysis and scheduled angiography or those who underwent primary PCI had similar outcomes to PH. The worse outcomes in CH rescue pts emphasizes the need to identify and expeditiously treat those pts needing rescue PCI.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research→French-language works237,207→