Significance of chest pain without ST changes during exercise treadmill testing.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise treadmill test is interpreted as positive or negative for ischemia in the presence or absence of ST depression respectively. This study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic value of chest pain without ST depression during exercise treadmill test. METHODS: A total of 180 patients who had abnormal exercise treadmill test result and subsequently underwent coronary angiography were studied. Patients were categorised as having ST depression and angina (group A), only ST depression (group B) and only angina (group C). Coronary angiograms of all patients were assessed and compared. RESULTS: Out of 180 patients [159 (88.3%) men and 21 (11.7%) women], 84 patients were in Group A, 64 in Group B and 32 in Group C. Characteristics like age, sex distribution and risk factors were similar in three groups. Significant coronary artery disease was seen in 77 (91.7%), 40 (62.5%) and in 25 (78.1%) patients in groups A, B and C respectively (p=0.02). Triple vessel disease was seen in 21 (25%), 11 (17.2%) and 5 (15.6%) patients in groups A, B and C respectively. Significant disease of left anterior descending artery was seen in 61 (72.6%), 26 (40.6%) and 23 (71.9%) in groups A, B and C respectively (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Occurrence of both ST depression and angina during exercise treadmill test has strong association with angiographic coronary artery disease whereas occurrence of either of the two has similar association with angiographic coronary artery disease with a trend towards more disease in the latter.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".