MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003548070 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jez321

Increased long-term mortality in women with high left ventricular ejection fraction: data from the CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter) long-term registry

2019· article· en· W3003548070 on OpenAlex
Cathérine Gebhard, Monika Marędziak, Michael Messerli, Ronny R. Buechel, Fay Y. Lin, Heidi Gransar, Stephan Achenbach, Mouaz H. Al‐Mallah, Daniele Andreini, Jeroen J. Bax, Daniel S. Berman, Matthew J. Budoff, Filippo Cademartiri, Tracy Q. Callister, Hyuk‐Jae Chang, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Ricardo C. Cury, Augustin DeLago, Gudrun Feuchtner, Martin Hadamitzky, Jöerg Hausleiter, Yong‐Jin Kim, Jonathon Leipsic, Erica Maffei, Hugo Marques, Pedro de Araújo Gonçalves, Gianluca Pontone, Gilbert Raff, Ronen Rubinshtein, Leslee J. Shaw, Todd C. Villines, Yao Lu, Erica C. Jones, Jessica M. Peña, James K. Min, Philipp A. Kaufmann

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSchweizerische HerzstiftungEMDO StiftungNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteOlga Mayenfisch StiftungNovartis FoundationSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Institutes of HealthHelmut Horten StiftungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEjection fractionMedicineHazard ratioCardiologyInternal medicineProportional hazards modelCoronary artery diseaseCohortConfidence intervalHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: There are significant sex-specific differences in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), with a higher LVEF being observed in women. We sought to assess the clinical relevance of an increased LVEF in women and men. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 4632 patients from the CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter) registry (44.8% women; mean age 58.7 ± 13.2 years in men and 59.5 ± 13.3 years in women, P = 0.05), in whom LVEF was measured by cardiac computed tomography, were categorized according to LVEF (low <55%, normal 55-65%, and high >65%). The prevalence of high LVEF was similar in both sexes (33.5% in women and 32.5% in men, P = 0.46). After 6 years of follow-up, no difference in mortality was observed in patients with high LVEF in the overall cohort (P = 0.41). When data were stratified by sex, women with high LVEF died more often from any cause as compared to women with normal LVEF (8.6% vs. 7.1%, log rank P = 0.032), while an opposite trend was observed in men (5.8% vs. 6.8% in normal LVEF, log rank P = 0.89). Accordingly, a first order interaction term of male sex and high LVEF was significant (hazard ratios 0.63, 95% confidence intervals 0.41-0.98, P = 0.043) in a Cox regression model of all-cause mortality adjusted for age, cardiovascular risk factors, and severity of coronary artery disease (CAD). CONCLUSION: Increased LVEF is highly prevalent in patients referred for evaluation of CAD and is associated with an increased risk of death in women, but not in men. Differentiating between normal and hyperdynamic left ventricles might improve risk stratification in women with CAD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01443637.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.298 · 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