Mortality and Health Service Use Following Acute Myocardial Infarction Among Persons with HIV: A Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with HIV have higher rates of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) than HIV-negative individuals. We compared mortality risk and health service use following AMI among people with and without HIV between January 1, 2002, and March 31, 2015. We conducted a population-based study using Ontario's administrative databases. Our primary outcomes were risk of inpatient death and death at 30 days following hospital discharge. In secondary analyses, we compared use of revascularization procedures within 90 days of AMI, as well as readmission or emergency department visits for heart disease and cardiology follow-up within 90 days of discharge. We studied 259,475 AMI patients, of whom 345 (0.13%) were people with HIV. AMI patients with HIV were younger than HIV-negative patients (mean age ± standard deviation: 54.4 ± 10.5 years vs. 69.3 ± 14.3 years). Following multivariable adjustment, the odds ratios for inpatient death and death at 30 days following discharge were 1.04 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.64-1.56] and 2.42 (95% CI 1.00-4.92), respectively. In secondary analyses, no differences were observed in receipt of revascularization procedures (hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; 95% CI 0.85-1.12), readmission or emergency department visit for heart disease (HR 1.18; 95% CI 0.85-1.62), or cardiology follow-up (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.76-1.01). People with HIV experience AMI at younger ages and may be at higher risk of death in the 30 days following hospital discharge, underscoring the importance of targeting modifiable cardiovascular disease risk factors in these 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".