MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044117007 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000021321

Prognostic value of CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores for post-discharge outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

2020· article· en· W3044117007 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoteng Ma, Qiaoyu Shao, Lisha Dong, Yujing Cheng, Sai Lv, Hua Shen, Jing Liang, Zhijian Wang, Yujie Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaBeijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals
KeywordsMedicineMaceInternal medicineHazard ratioPercutaneous coronary interventionConventional PCIAcute coronary syndromeCardiologyAtrial fibrillationMyocardial infarctionProportional hazards modelConfidence intervalStroke (engine)CHA2DS2–VASc scoreIschemiaIschemic stroke

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores were initially developed to assess the risk of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently, these two scoring systems have been demonstrated to predict long- and short-term cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in many patient cohorts. However, to the best of our knowledge, their prognostic value has not been fully elucidated in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to investigate the association of CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores with CV outcomes in such patients.We included a total of 915 ACS patients undergoing PCI in this study. CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores were calculated from data collected before discharge. The primary endpoint was defined as a composite of major adverse CV events (MACE) including overall death, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) and unplanned repeat revascularization. We assessed MACE's relationship to CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores using Cox proportional-hazard regression analyses.Mean follow-up duration was 918 days. MACE occurred in 167 (18.3%) patients. A higher CHADS2 score was associated with reduced event-free survival (EFS) from MACE (logrank test, P = .007) with differences potentiated if stratified by CHA2DS2-VASc score (logrank test, P < .001). Univariate analysis showed that both CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores were good predictors of MACE. In the multivariate Cox proportional-hazard regression analysis, CHA2DS2-VASc score (hazard ratio [HR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.27; P = .007) remained a useful predictor of MACE; however, CHADS2 score was no longer associated with increased risk of MACE. C-statistics for CHA2DS2-VASc score, GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) hospital discharge risk score (GRACE Score) and SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery) Score II (SS II) in predicting MACE were 0.614, 0.598, and 0.609, respectively.CHA2DS2-VASc score was an independent and significant predictor of MACE in ACS patients undergoing PCI, and its discriminatory performance was not inferior to those of GRACE Score and SS II.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207