MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mental Stress–Induced-Myocardial Ischemia in Young Patients With Recent Myocardial Infarction

2018· article· en· W2885260619 on OpenAlexaff
Viola Vaccarino, Samaah Sullivan, Muhammad Hammadah, Kobina Wilmot, Ibhar Al Mheid, Ronnie Ramadan, Lisa Elon, Pratik Pimple, Ernest Garcia, Jonathon A. Nye, Amit Shah, Ayman Alkhoder, Oleksiy Levantsevych, Hawkins Gay, Malik Obideen, Minxuan Huang, Tené T. Lewis, J. Douglas Bremner, Arshed A. Quyyumi, Paolo Raggi

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionCardiologyMyocardial ischemiaInternal medicineMental stressIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mental stress-induced myocardial ischemia (MSIMI) is frequent in patients with coronary artery disease and is associated with worse prognosis. Young women with a previous myocardial infarction (MI), a group with unexplained higher mortality than men of comparable age, have shown elevated rates of MSIMI, but the mechanisms are unknown. Methods: We studied 306 patients (150 women and 156 men) ≤61 years of age who were hospitalized for MI in the previous 8 months and 112 community controls (58 women and 54 men) frequency matched for sex and age to the patients with MI. Endothelium-dependent flow-mediated dilation and microvascular reactivity (reactive hyperemia index) were measured at rest and 30 minutes after mental stress. The digital vasomotor response to mental stress was assessed using peripheral arterial tonometry. Patients received 99m Tc-sestamibi myocardial perfusion imaging at rest, with mental (speech task) and conventional (exercise/pharmacological) stress. Results: The mean age of the sample was 50 years (range, 22–61). In the MI group but not among controls, women had a more adverse socioeconomic and psychosocial profile than men. There were no sex differences in cardiovascular risk factors, and among patients with MI, clinical severity tended to be lower in women. Women in both groups showed a higher peripheral arterial tonometry ratio during mental stress but a lower reactive hyperemia index after mental stress, indicating enhanced microvascular dysfunction after stress. There were no sex differences in flow-mediated dilation changes with mental stress. The rate of MSIMI was twice as high in women as in men (22% versus 11%, P =0.009), and ischemia with conventional stress was similarly elevated (31% versus 16%, P =0.002). Psychosocial and clinical risk factors did not explain sex differences in inducible ischemia. Although vascular responses to mental stress (peripheral arterial tonometry ratio and reactive hyperemia index) also did not explain sex differences in MSIMI, they were predictive of MSIMI in women only. Conclusions: Young women after MI have a 2-fold likelihood of developing MSIMI compared with men and a similar increase in conventional stress ischemia. Microvascular dysfunction and peripheral vasoconstriction with mental stress are implicated in MSIMI among women but not among men, perhaps reflecting women’s proclivity toward ischemia because of microcirculatory abnormalities.

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)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations234
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207