MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964648076 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2019-315042

Diagnosis of patients with angina and non-obstructive coronary disease in the catheter laboratory

2019· review· en· W2964648076 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseCatheterAnginaCoronary angiographyFractional flow reserveIntensive care medicineDiseasePopulationInterventional cardiologyCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyCardiologyCath labHealth careInternal medicineClinical trialRadiologyMyocardial infarctionConventional PCI

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Around 40% of all patients undergoing angiography are found to have normal coronary arteries or non-obstructive coronary artery disease (NOCAD). Despite the high prevalence, this is a group who rarely receive a definitive diagnosis, are frequently labelled and managed inappropriately and by and large, continue to remain symptomatic. Half of this group will have coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD), associated with a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events; identifying CMD represents a therapeutic target of unmet need. As the pressure wire has revolutionised our ability to interrogate epicardial coronary disease during the time of angiography, measuring flow can similarly classify NOCAD during a single procedure. Assessment of flow is a function that is already integral to some pressure wires and furthermore, the familiarity and usage of the combined Doppler and pressure wire is rapidly increasing-these are techniques that readily lend themselves to the skillset of a practising interventional cardiologist. We present a structured algorithm designed for cardiologists who frequently encounter NOCAD in the catheter laboratory, identifying specific disease phenotypes within this heterogeneous population with linked therapy. This review paper clearly explains the rationale for this algorithm and outlines its applicability to routine clinical practice and also, the importance of phenotyping for future research. Ultimately, personalised therapy could improve outcomes for both patients and healthcare providers; while these approaches in turn will need robust evaluation to ensure that they improve both clinical outcomes and health economic benefits, this proposal will provide a framework for future trials and evaluations.

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.

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)0.000
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.282 · 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