MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3085335913 · doi:10.1097/hco.0000000000000800

Generalizability of Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial in patients with a history of coronary artery bypass graft surgery

2020· review· en· W3085335913 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew Kosmopoulos, Subodh Verma, Gus Meglis, Deepak L. Bhatt, Raj Verma, C. David Mazer, Pierre Voisine

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Cardiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecNorth York General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGeneralizability theoryArteryPopulationCohortInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialBypass graftingCardiologySurgeryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), there remains persistent risk of ischemic events despite secondary prevention strategies, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering. Although REDUCE-IT recently demonstrated the benefits of icosapent ethyl (IPE) on reducing ischemic events in a broad population of primary and secondary prevention patients, its generalizability to a contemporary CABG population is not known. This article aims to ascertain the proportion of patients with a history of CABG that would be eligible for IPE treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: A review of recent literature highlights the presence of residual ischemic following CABG. Using the Québec Heart Database, a repository of contemporary Canadian cardiac patient information, was searched between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2016, to ascertain generalizability of IPE. SUMMARY: In a large (N = 12 641), contemporary, Canadian cohort of patients with a history of CABG and currently on statin therapy, 21.9, 33.6 and 26.4% would be eligible for IPE, according to REDUCE-IT, Health Canada, and Food and Drug Administration criteria, respectively. These analyses would support IPE as an adjunct to secondary prevention therapies post-CABG.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in CardiologySame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207