A comparison of health-related quality of life and disease severity in patients with stable coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CĂl: Kvalita Ĺživota souvisejĂcĂ se zdravĂm je spojena s rizikovĂ˝mi faktory kardiovaskulĂĄrnĂch onemocnÄnĂ. CĂlem studie bylo zjistit vztah objektivnĂho nĂĄlezu stabilnĂ anginy pectoris a kvality Ĺživota souvisejĂcĂ se zdravĂm.Metodika: Celkem byla analyzovĂĄna data od 339 respondentĹŻ. Respondenti v cĂlovĂŠ skupinÄ (n = 165) se stabilnĂ anginou pectoris a kontrolnĂ skupinÄ (n = 174) bez stabilnĂ anginy pectoris byli porovnĂĄni podle rizikovĂ˝ch faktorĹŻ kardiovaskulĂĄrnĂch onemocnÄnĂ. DotaznĂky Seattle Angina Questionnaire a EuroQol EQ-5D-3L byly porovnĂĄny s koronarografickĂ˝m nĂĄlezem a lĂŠkaĹem zaznamenanou klasifikacĂ Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS).VĂ˝sledky: Skupina respondentĹŻ se stabilnĂ anginou pectoris mÄla niŞťà hodnocenĂ ve vĹĄech domĂŠnĂĄch Seattle Angina Questionnaire (p < 0,01) a nĂĄstroje EQ-5D (p < 0,001) i pĹi stejnĂŠm zastoupenĂ rizikovĂ˝ch faktorĹŻ jako v kontrolnĂ skupinÄ respondentĹŻ bez anginy pectoris. ANOVA Kruskal-Wallis neprokĂĄzala v cĂlovĂŠm souboru vztah vĂ˝sledkĹŻ koronarografie s Şådnou z pÄti domĂŠn dotaznĂku Seattle Angina Questionnaire ani EQ-5D. CCS klasifikace a 3/5 domĂŠn Seattle Angina Questionnaire majĂ statisticky vĂ˝znamnĂ˝ vztah (α < 0,05) a EQ-5D index takĂŠ (p = 0,0161).ZĂĄvÄr: Respondenti se stabilnĂ anginou pectoris majĂ oproti kontrolnĂ skupinÄ pacientĹŻ podstupujĂcĂch koronarografii bez stabilnĂ anginy pectoris niŞťà kvalitu Ĺživota. V cĂlovĂŠm souboru nenĂ statisticky vĂ˝znamnĂ˝ vztah mezi koronarografickĂ˝m nĂĄlezem a kvalitou Ĺživota souvisejĂcĂ se zdravĂm. Statisticky vĂ˝znamnĂ˝ vztah byl mezi hodnocenĂm CCS klasifikace ve 3/5 domĂŠn Seattle Angina Questionnaire a EQ-5D indexu. HodnocenĂ kvality Ĺživota by mÄlo bĂ˝t zavedeno do bÄĹžnĂŠ oĹĄetĹovatelskĂŠ praxe k zapojenĂ pacientova pohledu na vnĂmĂĄnĂ tĂĹže onemocnÄnĂ.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".