MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047559957 · doi:10.7775/rac.es.v88.i3.18150

Resultados de la Encuesta COVID-19. Impacto en la atención cardiovascular del Registro Nacional de Infarto ARGEN IAM-ST

2020· article· es· W3047559957 on OpenAlexaff
Heraldo D ́Imperio, Juan Gagliardi, Rodrigo Zoni, Adrián Charask, Yanina Castillo Costa, María Pía Marturano, Walter Quiroga, Stella M. Macı́n

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Argentina de Cardiología · 2020
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introducción: La pandemia declarada por la OMS por el virus SARS CoV2 llevó al sistema de salud argentino a prepararse para la atención de casos de COVID-19, pero se desconoce el impacto en este escenario sobre patologías prevalentes, como las cardiovasculares. Material y métodos: Se realizó una encuesta transversal en los centros que participan del registro ARGEN-IAM-ST, que se desarrolló para indagar sobre la organización institucional, la atención ambulatoria, la internación en cuidados críticos y el personal de la salud. Resultados: Se encuestaron 80 centros; el 55% eran de dependencias públicas y el 97% con servicio de cuidados críticos. El 91% de las instituciones formó un comité de crisis por la pandemia. El 65% de los centros tomó medidas de atención ambulatoria por el distanciamiento social. Para el 89% se redujeron los ingresos por patologías cardiovasculares, y la magnitud de la caída tuvo una media de 57% (DE ± 18). En 24% de los centros se registró personal de la salud contagiados con SARS-Cov2. Conclusión: Un elevado porcentaje de centros que participan del registro continuo ARGEN-IAM-ST crearon comités de crisis para reorganizar la atención; casi dos tercios de ellos tomaron medidas para seguimiento ambulatorio y se registró una importante caída de la ocupación de camas de pacientes cardiovasculares.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.361
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Argentina de CardiologíaSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207