MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034369271 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.200374

Trends in the Inpatient Burden of Coronary Artery Disease in Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis: A Study of a Large National Dataset

2020· article· en· W3034369271 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yiming Luo, Jiehui Xu, Changchuan Jiang, Chayakrit Krittanawong, Lingling Wu, Yifeng Yang, Dhrubajyoti Bandyopadhyay, Peter Cram, Said A. Ibrahim, Bella Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionConfoundingLogistic regressionGranulomatosis with polyangiitisCADDiseaseCardiologyEmergency medicineVasculitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular (CV) diseases are serious comorbidities in patients with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA). In a sample of patients hospitalized for GPA, we sought to examine trends in the burden of coronary artery disease (CAD) and its 2 serious manifestations, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure (HF). METHODS: We used the National Inpatient Sample to conduct a retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Our sample consisted of hospitalizations for GPA between 2005 and 2014. We examined trends in the proportion of CAD, AMI, and HF in all hospitalizations with GPA compared to those without GPA. We used logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders and included interaction terms. RESULTS: Among a total of 103,453 GPA hospitalizations, 20,351 (19.7%) hospitalizations had a concurrent diagnosis of CAD. GPA with CAD was associated with overall lower burden of traditional CV risk factors compared to non-GPA with CAD, with the exception of chronic kidney disease (57% vs 21%). Over the 10-year study period, there were rising trends in the inpatient burden of CAD (16.6% in 2005 to 22.7% in 2014) and CAD with HF (4.3% in 2005 to 9.9% in 2014), but not AMI (1.2% in 2005 to 1.1% in 2014), in GPA hospitalizations compared to non-GPA controls. CONCLUSION: In this national sample of GPA hospitalizations, we found that the burden of CAD and CAD with HF was on the rise over the 10-year period compared to non-GPA; however, it was not the case for AMI.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicVasculitis and related conditionsFrench-language works237,207