High-sensitivity cardiac troponin concentrations at emergency department presentation in females and males with an acute cardiac outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background There is interest in utilizing different cut-offs per sex for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) but less so for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) for patient management in the acute setting. Our objective was to assess if differences in hs-cTn concentrations exist between males and females for an acute cardiac outcome following the presentation measurement in the emergency department. Methods An observational emergency department population with hs-cTn measurements (Roche Diagnostics and Abbott Diagnostics) at presentation with seven-day outcomes for a composite acute cardiac outcome (i.e. myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ventricular arrhythmia, heart failure or cardiovascular death) (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01994577). Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed for each sex with both hs-cTn assays. Results In those patients who had a composite acute cardiac outcome ( n = 128 females; n = 145 males), there was no difference in hs-cTn concentrations between the sexes (median [IQR] female hs-cTnT = 35 ng/L [21-69] vs. male hs-cTnT = 38 ng/L [19-77], P = 0.95; and median [IQR] female hs-cTnI = 27 ng/L [12-75] vs. male hs-cTnI = 26 ng/L [12-85], P = 0.97]. There was also no difference in the area under the curve between the hs-cTn assays and between the sexes ( P > 0.10). Comparing hs-cTn concentrations in those patients with the composite outcome between the sexes <60 years and ≥60 years of age also did not yield significant differences ( P > 0.70). Conclusions The concentrations and area under the curves of hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI at patient presentation in the emergency department for an acute composite cardiac outcome were similar between the sexes in this exploratory study.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".