MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2889279464 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy565.1089

1089Prognostic value of a positive troponin across the age spectrum in over a quarter of a million patients (NHIC Troponin Study)

2018· article· en· W2889279464 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vasileios F. Panoulas, Amit Kaura, Ben Glampson, Abdulrahim Mulla, Anoop D Shah, Keith M. Channon, Rajesh Kharbanda, Narbeh Melikian, Riyaz Patel, Divaka Perera, Ajay M. Shah, D.P. Francis, Jamil Mayet

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)TroponinTroponin ICardiologyInternal medicineValue (mathematics)Myocardial infarctionStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In the past two decades, assays for troponin have undergone vast improvements, allowing fast detection of troponin with increased precision. With improved sensitivity of current troponin assays, more patients end up with a positive troponin result. There is limited data to help inform the implications of a positive troponin test across the age spectrum, in clinical practice. Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the overall prognostic impact of a positive troponin result on all-cause mortality in patients in whom troponin testing has been done for clinical purposes. Methods: The NIHR Health Informatics Collaborative (NHIC) project was established to enable the sharing and repurposing of routinely captured clinical data for re-use in research. All troponin values measured during the study period (generally 2010 to 2017) were assembled from five contributing cardiovascular centres. The results were dichotomised as being positive or negative based on the 99th percentile of the upper limit of normal for all relevant troponin assays. All patients were followed up on the National Health Service Spine Application, Summary Care Record until death or censoring on 1st April 2017. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software version 24.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, United States).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research→French-language works237,207→