MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965223761 · doi:10.14740/cr856

Prevalence and Clinical Implication of Wellens’ Sign in Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

2019· article· en· W2965223761 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueCardiology Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCulpritCardiologyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionST segmentUnstable anginaElectrocardiographyCoronary artery diseaseSign (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Symmetrically inverted or biphasic T waves in anterior precordial leads, Wellens' sign, have been shown to represent impending infarction of left anterior descending (LAD) territory among unstable angina patients in the studies published more than 3 decades ago, when non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) was not a recognized entity. The clinical implication of Wellens' sign in the contemporary NSTEMI cohort has not been clarified. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all NSTEMI patients who underwent coronary angiography between January 2013 and June 2014. Wellens' sign was defined as either symmetrically inverted T waves (≥ 0.10 mV) or biphasic T waves in both leads V2 and V3. Coronary angiograms were reviewed and culprit lesions were determined for each patient. RESULTS: A total of 274 patients were included in the final analysis, of whom 24 (8.8%) had Wellens' sign. Among these 24 patients, 16 had a LAD culprit (eight proximal), two had a non-LAD culprit, and six had non-obstructive coronary artery disease. Patients with Wellens' sign were more likely to have LAD culprit (66.7% vs. 19.6%, P < 0.001) and proximal LAD culprit (33.3% vs. 14.4%, P = 0.035) than those without it. Wellens' sign had a sensitivity of 24.6% and a specificity of 96.2% to predict LAD culprit. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed that: 1) Wellens' sign was seen in 8.8% of the patients with NSTEMI; 2) Two-thirds of patients with Wellens' sign had LAD culprit and one-third had proximal LAD culprit; and 3) Sensitivity and specificity of Wellens' sign to predict LAD culprit were 24.6% and 96.2%, respectively.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.344 · 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