MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P5300Prognostic implications of baseline and change from baseline values of plasma biomarkers that reflect extracellular matrix regulatory mechanisms and collagen synthesis in patients with heart failure

2017· article· en· W2763922831 on OpenAlexaff
Michael R. Zile, Eileen O’Meara, Brian Claggett, Margaret F. Prescott, Scott D. Solomon, Karl Swedberg, Milton Packer, John J.V. McMurray, V. Shi, Martin Lefkowitz, Jean L. Rouleau

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Fibrosis and Remodeling
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBaseline (sea)Extracellular matrixHeart failureCardiologyInternal medicineCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Myocardial fibrosis is an important pathophysiologic mechanism underlying the development of heart failure (HF). Plasma biomarkers that reflect mechanisms of extracellular matrix (ECM) homeostasis, collagen synthesis and profibrotic state have prognostic value in HF patients. Purpose: Examine association between rate of primary composite outcome (CV death or HF hospitalization) and biomarkers of ECM homeostasis and collagen synthesis in PARADIGM-HF. Methods: Biomarkers available at both baseline and 8 months after randomization in ≈ 1700 patients: aldosterone, sST2, TIMP-1, MMP-2, MMP-9, Gal-3, PINP, PIIINP. Baseline biomarker values and changes from baseline to 8 months were related to primary outcome. Results: Baseline values of sST-2, TIMP-1, and PIIINP were associated with primary outcome rate (Table). Change from baseline to 8 months in sST-2 and TIMP-1 was associated with primary outcome or CV death rate. ... Conclusions: Baseline and change from baseline values of biomarkers associated with profibrotic signaling have important prognostic value.

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)0.001
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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiac Fibrosis and RemodelingFrench-language works237,207