MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920807567 · doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.03.003

1-Year Impact on Medical Practice and Clinical Outcomes of FFRCT

2019· article· en· W2920807567 on OpenAlexaff
Manesh R. Patel, Bjarne Linde Nørgaard, Timothy Fairbairn, Koen Nieman, Takashi Akasaka, Daniel S. Berman, Gilbert Raff, Lynne Koweek, Gianluca Pontone, Tomohiro Kawasaki, Niels Peter Rønnow Sand, Jesper Møller Jensen, Tetsuya Amano, Michael Poon, Kristian Altern Øvrehus, Jeroen Sonck, Mark Rabbat, Sarah Mullen, Bernard De Bruyne, Campbell Rogers, Hitoshi Matsuo, Jeroen J. Bax, Jonathon Leipsic

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical PracticeMedicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1-year data from the international ADVANCE (Assessing Diagnostic Value of Non-invasive FFRCT in Coronary Care) Registry of patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) was used to evaluate the relationship of fractional flow reserve derived from coronary CTA (FFRCT) with downstream care and clinical outcomes. Guidelines for management of chest pain using noninvasive imaging pathways are based on short- to intermediate-term outcomes. Patients (N = 5,083) evaluated for clinically suspected coronary artery disease and in whom atherosclerosis was identified by coronary CTA were prospectively enrolled at 38 international sites from July 15, 2015, to October 20, 2017. Demographics, symptom status, coronary CTA and FFRCT findings and resultant site-based treatment plans, and clinical outcomes through 1 year were recorded and adjudicated by a blinded core laboratory. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), death, myocardial infarction (MI), and acute coronary syndrome leading to urgent revascularization were captured. At 1 year, 449 patients did not have follow-up data. Revascularization occurred in 1,208 (38.40%) patients with an FFRCT ≤0.80 and in 89 (5.60%) with an FFRCT >0.80 (relative risk [RR]: 6.87; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.59 to 8.45; p < 0.001). MACE occurred in 55 patients, 43 events occurred in patients with an FFRCT ≤0.80 and 12 occurred in those with an FFRCT >0.80 (RR: 1.81; 95% CI: 0.96 to 3.43; p = 0.06). Time to first event (all-cause death or MI) occurred in 38 (1.20%) patients with an FFRCT ≤0.80 compared with 10 (0.60%) patients with an FFRCT >0.80 (RR: 1.92; 95% CI: 0.96 to 3.85; p = 0.06). Time to first event (cardiovascular death or MI) occurred cardiovascular death or MI occurred more in patients with an FFRCT ≤0.80 compared with patients with an FFRCT >0.80 (25 [0.80%] vs. 3 [0.20%]; RR: 4.22; 95% CI: 1.28 to 13.95; p = 0.01). The 1-year outcomes from the ADVANCE FFRCT Registry show low rates of events in all patients, with less revascularization and a trend toward lower MACE and significantly lower cardiovascular death or MI in patients with a negative FFRCT compared with patients with abnormal FFRCT values. (Assessing Diagnostic Value of Non-invasive FFRCT in Coronary Wave [ADVANCE]; NCT02499679)

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations311
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC. Cardiovascular imagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207