MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

66 Cognitive impairment is not associated with 30 day major adverse cardiovascular events in older (75 years) patients presenting with non-st elevation acute coronary syndrome: an evaluation from the icon1 study

2017· article· en· W2736936522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sophie Gu, Jonathan A. Batty, Hannah Sinclair, Murugapathy Verrasamy, Alan Bagnall, Ian Purcell, Richard J. Edwards, Ioakim Spyridopoulos, Mohaned Egred, Azfar Zaman, Javed Ahmed, Vijay Kunadian

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMaceAcute coronary syndromeMontreal Cognitive AssessmentInternal medicineST elevationDementiaStroke (engine)Cognitive declineCoronary artery diseaseClinical Dementia RatingCardiologyPhysical therapyMyocardial infarctionConventional PCIDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Dementia is leading cause of death in the UK and shares many common risk factors with coronary artery disease. The relationship between cognition and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in older patients presenting with non ST elevation Acute Coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) is not known. Aim To investigate the association of cognitive impairment with 30 day MACE (mortality, hospital readmission with ACS, unplanned revascularisation, stroke and major bleeding events) in older patients presenting with NSTEACS in the ICON1 study. Method Over a period of 34 months 277 patients 75 years of age, admitted for invasive management of NSTEACS, were enrolled into a multicentre prospective observational study. Cognitive assessment was performed by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test, where a cut-off of 26 is used to determine cognitive impairment. Frailty was assessed using the Fried criteria, where a score of 0 is robust, 1 or 2 is pre-frail and 3 is frail. Results 251 patients had a MoCA score calculated at presentation (mean±Standard deviation [SD]=25.1±3.3), nearly half of the patients (n=122, 48.6%) had cognitive impairment. The mean age was 81.2±4.0 years (mean± Standard Deviation [SD]). Patients with cognitive impairment were older compared to normal cognition group (82.2±3.9 vs. 80.2±3.9 years, p<0.001), and were frail (36.1% vs. 18.6%, p=0.002). Overall 19 (7.6%) patients reached MACE outcome, the rate of composite adverse outcomes were 6.6% vs. 8.5% (p=0.555) respectively. No patient died at 30 day in the selected cohort and no one had ST elevation myocardial infarction. There was no difference in the occurrence of non ST elevation myocardial infarction (0.8% vs. 0.8%), unstable angina (0.8% vs. 2.3%, p=0.808), unplanned revascularisation (1.6% vs. 1.6%, p=1.0), stroke/Transient Ischaemic Attack (0% vs. 0.8%, p=1.0), and major bleeding (4.1% vs. 3.9%, p=1.0), and readmission with ACS rate (1.6% vs. 3.1%, p=0.684) between the impaired and normal cognition groups respectively. Conclusion Cognitive impairment is common in patients over 75 years of age with NSTEACS managed invasively. Those with significant impairment are older and frail. Short-term 30 day MACE outcomes are not different between cognition groups in this selected cohort of patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeartSame topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207