MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895459144 · doi:10.4414/cvm.2016.00399

Prevention, epidemiology, and prognosis of perioperative myocardial injury

2016· article· en· W2895459144 on OpenAlexaff
Erin N. Sloan, Erin E. Morley, P.J. Devereaux

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerioperativeEpidemiologyMedicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCardiologyEmergency medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annually over 200 million adults undergo noncardiac surgery worldwide.Myocardial ischaemia is a frequent cause of perioperative cardiac morbidity and mortality.Approximately 8 million patients will suffer a myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS) each year.MINS is defined as a prognostically important myocardial injury due to ischaemia that occurs during, or within 30 days after, noncardiac surgery.The diagnostic criterion for MINS is an elevated troponin measurement resulting from myocardial ischaemia.MINS is a strong, independent predictor of 30-day and 1-year mortality.The majority of patients suffering MINS would go undetected without troponin monitoring since >80% of these patients do not experience ischaemic symptoms.Intensification of pharmacotherapy may reduce 30-day mortality in patients who have experienced MINS.This pape r will review the epidemiology, prevention, prognosis and treatment of MINS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiovascular MedicineSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207