MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618995125 · doi:10.1002/clc.22730

Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the <scp>CLARIFY</scp> registry of outpatients with stable coronary artery disease

2017· article· en· W2618995125 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuel Sorbets, Nicola Greenlaw, Roberto Ferrari, Ian Ford, Kim Fox, Jean‐Claude Tardif, Michał Tendera, Philippe Gabríel Steg

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cardiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart rate and cardiovascular health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersServierSanofiNovartisGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineRevascularizationObservational studyCardiologyEpidemiologyLife expectancyStenosisHeart failureAcute coronary syndromePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite major advances in prevention and treatment, coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide. Whereas many sources of data are available on the epidemiology of acute coronary syndromes, fewer datasets reflect the contemporary management and outcomes of stable CAD patients. HYPOTHESIS: A worldwide contemporary registry would improve our knowledge about stable CAD. The main objectives are to describe the demographics, clinical profile, contemporary management and outcomes of outpatients with stable CAD; to identify gaps between evidence and treatment; and to investigate long-term prognostic determinants. METHODS: CLARIFY (ProspeCtive observational LongitudinAl RegIstry oF patients with stable coronary arterY disease) is an ongoing international observational longitudinal registry. Stable CAD patients from 45 countries in Europe, Asia, America, Middle East, Australia and Africa were enrolled between November 2009 and June 2010. The inclusion criteria were previous myocardial infarction, evidence of coronary stenosis >50%, proven symptomatic myocardial ischemia or prior revascularization procedure. The main exclusion criteria were serious non-cardiovascular disease, conditions interfering with life expectancy or severe other cardiovascular disease (including advanced heart failure). Follow-up visits were planned annually for up to 5 years, interspersed with 6-month telephone calls. RESULTS: Of the 32,703 patients enrolled, most (77.6%) were male, age (mean ± SD) was 64.2 ± 10.5 years, and 71.0% were receiving treatment for hypertension; mean ± SD resting heart rate was 68.2 ± 10.6 bpm. Patients were enrolled based on a history of myocardial infarction >3 months earlier (57.7%), having at least one stenosis >50% on coronary angiography (61.1%), proven symptomatic myocardial ischemia on non-invasive testing (23.1%), or history of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft (69.8%). Baseline characteristics were similar across the four subgroups identified by the four inclusion criteria. CONCLUSION: CLARIFY will provide a useful resource for understanding the current epidemiology of stable 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.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations49
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical CardiologySame topicHeart rate and cardiovascular healthFrench-language works237,207