MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982055013 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz746.0487

P5542Predictors of the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with unstable angina with conservative treatment strategy

2019· article· en· W2982055013 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
И. В. Лазарева, Е. А. Медведева, L. Gelis, I. Rousskikh, N. Shibeka

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUnstable anginaInternal medicineCardiologyMyocardial infarctionCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyAnginaTroponinDiabetes mellitusTroponin T

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To identify independent predictors of the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients (pts) with unstable angina (UA) in a conservative treatment strategy. Material and methods The study involved 236 patients with UA with low risk according to GRACE scale and conservative treatment strategy. The end points were: recurrent UA, myocardial infarction (MI), death. The mean age was 60.2±7.3 years. All pts were performed general blood analysis, determination of troponin I, BNP, C-reactive protein, myeloperoxidase, von Willebrand factor, fibrinogen, antithrombin III and also the performance of the thrombin generation test, aggregatogram on aggregometry Multiplate impedance and ECG, EchoCG, Holter ECG. Results Cardiovascular events developed in 104 (44%) pts during 5 years of follow-up, and in the first year of follow - up-in 58 people (24.6%), followed annually by 10–14% of events for the year. MI developed in 21 pts (8.9%), recurrent angina in 75 (31.8%) pts, 51 (21.6%) pts underwent coronary artery stenting, and 26 (11%) pts underwent coronary bypass surgery, 8 (3.4%) patients died. Having studied all the objective data of the observed patients, we concluded that independent predictors of the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events were: previous MI (RR=2,8; 95% CI 1,32–6,08; p=0,0028), type II Diabetes (RR=3,1; 95% CI 1,78- 5,37; p=0,0001), first-time angina pectoris (RR=3,7; 95% CI 2,68–5,85; p=0,001, smoking (RR=2,1; 95% CI 1,21–3,74; p=0,0129), baseline myeloperoxidase >316 pmol/l (RR=3,1; 95% CI 1,29–4,74; p=0,029), high sensitive CRP >3,8 g/l (RR=3,9; 95% CI 2, 44–6,14; p=0,0001), mean platelet volume >9,6fl (RR=2,9; 95% CI 1,49–5,52; p=0,0006), area under the curve ADP- test AUC >60 U (RR=3,4; 95% CI 2, 3–5,2; p=0,002). Conclusions Cardiovascular events developed in 44% of pts over 5 years of follow-up. Independent predictors of adverse outcomes in pts with UA with low risk according to GRACE scale were: previous MI, type II Diabetes mellitus, first-time angina pectoris, smoking, baseline myeloperoxidase levels>316 pmol/l, highly sensitive CRP>3.8 g/l, MPV>9.6fl, and the area under the ADP test curve >60 U.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207