Outcomes of a Provincial Myocardial Infarction Reperfusion Strategy: A Population-Based, Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fibrinolysis is an acceptable treatment for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) when primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) cannot be performed within 120 minutes. The American Heart Association has recommended Emergency Medical Services (EMS) interventions such as prehospital fibrinolysis (PHF), prehospital electrocardiogram (ECG), and hospital bypass direct to PCI center. Nova Scotia, Canada has incorporated these interventions into a unique province-wide approach to STEMI care. A retrospective cohort analysis comparing the primary outcome of 30-day mortality for patients receiving either prehospital or emergency department (ED) fibrinolysis (EDF) to patients transported directly by EMS from community or regional ED for primary PCI was conducted. METHODS: This retrospective, population-based cohort study included all STEMI patients in Nova Scotia who survived to hospital admission from July 2011 through July 2013. Three provincial databases were used to collect demographic, 30-day mortality, hospital readmission, and rescue PCI data. The results were grouped and compared according to reperfusion strategy received: PHF, EDF, patients brought by ambulance via EMS direct to PCI (EMS to PCI), and ED to PCI (ED to PCI). RESULTS: There were 1,071 STEMI patients included with 145 PHF, 606 EDF, 98 EMS to PCI, and 222 ED to PCI. There were no significant differences in 30-day mortality across groups (n, %): PHF 5(3); EDF 36(6); EHS to PCI <5(2); and ED to PCI 10(4); P = .28. There was no significant difference in patients receiving fibrinolysis who underwent rescue PCI. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital fibrinolysis incorporated into a province-wide approach to STEMI treatment is feasible with no observed difference in patient 30-day mortality outcomes observed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".