Psychosocial stress and major cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary heart disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Assess the risk of ischaemic events associated with psychosocial stress in patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD). METHODS: Psychosocial stress was assessed by a questionnaire in 14 577 patients (median age 65.0, IQR 59, 71; 81.6% males) with stable CHD on optimal secondary preventive therapy in the prospective randomized STABILITY clinical trial. Adjusted Cox regression models were used to assess associations between individual stressors, baseline cardiovascular risk factors and outcomes. RESULTS: After 3.7 years of follow-up, depressive symptoms, loss of interest and financial stress were associated with increased risk (hazard ratio, 95% confidence interval) of CV death (1.21, 1.09-1.34; 1.15, 1.05-1.27; and 1.19, 1.08-1.30, respectively) and the primary composite end-point of CV death, nonfatal MI or nonfatal stroke (1.21, 1.13-1.30; 1.19, 1.11-1.27; and 1.17, 1.10-1.24, respectively). Living alone was related to higher risk of CV death (1.68, 1.38-2.05) and the primary composite end-point (1.28, 1.11-1.48), whereas being married as compared with being widowed, was associated with lower risk of CV death (0.64, 0.49-0.82) and the primary composite end-point (0.81, 0.67-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial stress, such as depressive symptoms, loss of interest, living alone and financial stress, were associated with increased CV mortality in patients with stable CHD despite optimal medical secondary prevention treatment. Secondary prevention of CHD should therefore focus also on psychosocial issues both in clinical management and in future clinical trials.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it