MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Trends in Performance and Opportunities for Improvement on a Composite Measure of Acute Myocardial Infarction Care

2019· article· en· W2922107505 on OpenAlexaff
Nihar R. Desai, Jacob A. Udell, Yongfei Wang, Erica S. Spatz, Kumar Dharmarajan, Tariq Ahmad, Howard Julien, Amarnath Annapureddy, Abhinav Goyal, James A. de Lemos, Frederick A. Masoudi, Deepak L. Bhatt, Karl E. Minges, Harlan M. Krumholz, Jeptha P. Curtis

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsWomen's College Hospital
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionReferralRehabilitationEmergency medicineGuidelineReperfusion therapyAcute carePhysical therapyInternal medicineHealth careFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Despite improvements on individual process of care measures for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), little is known about performance on a composite measure of AMI care that assesses the delivery of many components of high-quality AMI care. We sought to examine trends in patient- and hospital-level performance on a composite defect-free care measure, identify disparities in the performance across sociodemographic groups, and identify opportunities to further improve quality and outcomes. Methods and Results We calculated the proportion of patients in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry-Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines (now known as the Chest Pain - Myocardial Infarction Registry) between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, receiving defect-free AMI care including guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy, timely provision of medical and reperfusion therapy, assessment of ventricular function, referral to cardiac rehabilitation, and smoking cessation counseling for patients with AMI. A total of 522 800 patients at 222 hospitals were included. Overall, the proportion of patients receiving defect-free care significantly increased from 66.0% in 2010 to 77.1% in 2017 ( P<0.001). Improvements in performance were observed across all sociodemographic subgroups, with the greatest absolute improvement observed for black and Hispanic patients ( P<0.001). However, absolute performance was consistently lower among older patients, women, black and Hispanic patients, and those with government insurance in 2017 ( P<0.001 for all). Improvements in care and reduced variation in performance were observed at the hospital level overall (2010, median [IQR] 67.2% [40.7%-76.3%]; 2017, median [IQR] 80.7% [73.1%-88.1%]; P<0.001) as well as across region, safety net status, teaching status, and proportion of patients who are nonwhite and have Medicaid insurance coverage ( P<0.001 for all). Conclusions Despite improvements in the proportion of patients with AMI receiving defect-free care overall and across sociodemographic groups, nearly 1 in 4 patients in 2017 still did not receive optimal care and absolute performance was consistently lower among older patients, women, black, and Hispanic patients. Composite measures of cardiovascular care, which assess the delivery of several evidence-based processes of care, can illuminate opportunities to improve the quality of care beyond that provided by conventional process measures.

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)0.001
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 score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207