Influence of Preadmission Frailty on Short- and Mid-Term Prognoses in Octogenarians With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Octogenarians, who are frequently frail, represent a large proportion of patients admitted for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We investigated the relationship between frailty, assessed by the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and short- and mid-term prognoses in octogenarian STEMI patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used a multicenter registry data of 1,301 patients with STEMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between January 2014 and December 2016. Of them, 273 were retrospectively analyzed after categorization into 3 groups based on the preadmission CFS (CFS 1-3, 140 patients; CFS 4-5, 99 patients; and CFS 6-8, 34 patients). We evaluated the influence of CFS on overall mortality at 2 years and on non-home discharge, defined as the composite of in-hospital death and new transfer to a hospital or nursing home. During the study period (median, 565 days), the overall mortality and ratio of non-home discharge increased as CFS increased. After adjustment for multivariable analysis, the severely frail continued to be significantly associated with an increased risk of overall mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-5.05; P=0.026) and non-home discharge (adjusted odds ratio 9.50; 95% CI 3.48-25.99; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty, as assessed by CFS, had an influence on short- and mid-term prognoses in octogenarian patients with STEMI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".