MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008300190 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2020.02.007

Comparison of Troponin Elevation, Prior Myocardial Infarction, and Chest Pain in Acute Ischemic Heart Failure

2020· article· en· W3008300190 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cassandra Freitas, Xuesong Wang, Yin Ge, Heather J. Ross, Peter C. Austin, Peter S. Pang, Dennis T. Ko, Michael E. Farkouh, Thérèse A. Stukel, John J.V. McMurray, Douglas S. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreHeart and Stroke FoundationSunnybrook Health Science CentreTed Rogers Centre for Heart ResearchInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareUniversity Health NetworkHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionChest painTroponinHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure (HF) with concomitant ischemic heart disease (IHD) have not been well characterized. We examined survival of patients with ischemic HF syndrome (IHFS), defined as presentation with acute HF and concomitant features suggestive of IHD. METHODS: Patients were included if they presented with acute HF to hospitals in Ontario, Canada. IHD was defined by any of the following criteria: angina/chest pain, prior myocardial infarction (MI), or troponin elevation that was above the upper limit of normal (mild) or suggestive of cardiac injury. Deaths were determined after hospital presentation. RESULTS: interaction = 0.588). After multivariable adjustment, prior MI and angina were not associated with higher mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: In acute HF, elevated troponin, but not prior MI or angina, was associated with a higher risk of 30-day and 1-year mortality irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207