MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182247235 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2021.06.012

Trends of Sex Differences in Clinical Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction in the United States

2021· article· en· W3182247235 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsImpactPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityCanadian Heart Research CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionOdds ratioConfidence intervalLogistic regressionInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusPercutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Female patients have been shown to experience worse clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) compared with male patients. However, it is unclear what trend these differences followed over time. METHODS: test was performed to examine the trend of management and in-hospital outcomes over the study period. RESULTS: < 0.001) and these rates have not narrowed over time (2004 vs 2015: aOR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.04-1.09] vs 1.11 [95% CI, 1.07-1.15), with similar observations recorded for major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: In this temporal analysis of AMI hospitalizations over 12 years, we showed lower receipt of invasive therapies and higher mortality rates in women, with no change in temporal trends. There needs to be a systematic and consistent effort toward exploring these disparities to identify strategies to mitigate them.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.337 · 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