MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025856548 · doi:10.18565/cardio.2015.10.76-82

Predisposition to Psychological Distress in Patients After Coronary Bypass Surgery: Relation to One Year Prognosis

2015· article· en· W3025856548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
А. Н. Сумин, Raĭkh Oi, Р А Гайфулин, Е В Корок, А. В. Безденежных, С. В. Иванов, О. Л. Барбараш

Bibliographic record

VenueKardiologiia · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBypass graftingArteryAnginaInternal medicineCardiologyType D personalityCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyDistressPsychological distressMyocardial infarctionMental healthAnxietyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: to assess effect of type D personality (TDP) on one year prognosis after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Personality type was evaluated using the DS-14 scale in 683 patients before and in 1 year after CABG; 152 patients had TDP, 531 had not. After 1 year of follow-up we assessed functional class of angina and chronic heart failure, and registered cardiovascular complications (CVC): deaths, myocardial infarctions, strokes, amputations, thromboses of arteries of lower extremities, hospitalizations, requirements in repetitive angiographies of coronary grafts. Rate of development of combined end point comprising all these events was also evaluated. RESULTS: During follow-up CVC developed more often in patients with TDP compared with those without TDP (31.8 and 14.6%, respectively, =0.049). According to multifactorial regression analysis TDP was independently associated with 3.21 fold increase in risk of CVC. CONCLUSION: Detection of TDP after CABG is advisable for conducting subsequent interventions directed at improvement of long term results of treatment.

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)0.000
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKardiologiiaSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207