Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intensive risk factor modification significantly improves outcomes for patients with diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. However, the degree to which secondary prevention treatment goals are achieved in international clinical practice is unknown. METHODS: Attainment of 5 secondary prevention parameters-aspirin use, lipid control (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL or statin therapy), blood pressure control (<140 mm Hg systolic, <90 mm Hg diastolic), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker use, and nonsmoking status-was evaluated among 13 616 patients from 38 countries with diabetes mellitus and known cardiovascular disease at entry into TECOS (Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin). Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between individual and regional factors and secondary prevention achievement at baseline. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to determine the association between baseline secondary prevention achievement and cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. RESULTS: Overall, 29.9% of patients with diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease achieved all 5 secondary prevention parameters at baseline, although 71.8% achieved at least 4 parameters. North America had the highest proportion (41.2%), whereas Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and Latin America had proportions of ≈25%. Individually, blood pressure control (57.9%) had the lowest overall attainment, whereas nonsmoking status had the highest (89%). Over a median 3.0 years of follow-up, a higher baseline secondary prevention score was associated with improved outcomes in a step-wise graded relationship (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.77 for those patients achieving all 5 measures versus those achieving ≤2). CONCLUSIONS: In an international trial population, significant opportunities exist to improve the quality of cardiovascular secondary prevention care among patients with diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease, which in turn could lead to reduced risk of downstream cardiovascular events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00790205.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".