MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3145751087 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2020-318650

Racial, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in patients undergoing left atrial appendage closure

2021· article· en· W3145751087 on OpenAlexaff
Robbie Sparrow, Shubrandu Sanjoy, Yun‐Hee Choi, Islam Y. Elgendy, Hani Jneid, Pedro Villablanca, David R. Holmes, Ashish Pershad, M. Chadi Alraies, Luciano A. Sposato, Mamas A. Mamas, Rodrigo Bagur

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSocioeconomic statusQuartileDemographyComorbidityEthnic groupPopulationCohortStroke (engine)Internal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This manuscript aims to explore the impact of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status on in-hospital complication rates after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). METHODS: The US National Inpatient Sample was used to identify hospitalisations for LAAC between 1 October 2015 to 31 December 2018. These patients were stratified by race/ethnicity and quartiles of median neighbourhood income. The primary outcome was the occurrence of in-hospital major adverse events, defined as a composite of postprocedural bleeding, cardiac and vascular complications, acute kidney injury and ischaemic stroke. RESULTS: Of 6478 unweighted hospitalisations for LAAC, 58% were male and patients of black, Hispanic and 'other' race/ethnicity each comprised approximately 5% of the cohort. Adjusted by the older Americans population, the estimated number of LAAC procedures was 69.2/100 000 for white individuals, as compared with 29.5/100 000 for blacks, 47.2/100 000 for Hispanics and 40.7/100 000 for individuals of 'other' race/ethnicity. Black patients were ~5 years younger but had a higher comorbidity burden. The primary outcome occurred in 5% of patients and differed significantly between racial/ethnic groups (p<0.001) but not across neighbourhood income quartiles (p=0.88). After multilevel modelling, the overall rate of in-hospital major adverse events was higher in black patients as compared with whites (OR: 1.60, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.10, p<0.001); however, the incidence of acute kidney injury was higher in Hispanics (OR: 2.19, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.17, p<0.001). No significant differences were found in adjusted overall in-hospital complication rates between income quartiles. CONCLUSION: In this study assessing racial/ethnic disparities in patients undergoing LAAC, minorities are under-represented, specifically patients of black race/ethnicity. Compared with whites, black patients had higher comorbidity burden and higher rates of in-hospital complications. Lower socioeconomic status was not associated with complication rates.

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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