Evaluation of optimal medical therapy in acute myocardial infarction patients with prior stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with prior stroke is a common clinical dilemma. Currently, the application of optimal medical therapy (OMT) and its impact on clinical outcomes are not clear in this patient population. Methods: We retrieved 765 AMI patients with prior stroke who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during the index hospitalization from the international multicenter BleeMACS registry. All of the subjects were divided into two groups based on the prescription they were given prior to discharge. Baseline characteristics and procedural variables were compared between the OMT and non-OMT groups. Mortality, re-AMI, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and bleeding were followed-up for 1 year. Results: Approximately 5% of all patients presenting with AMI were admitted to the hospital for ischemic stroke. Although the prescription rate of each OMT medication was reasonably high (73.3%–97.3%), 47.7% lacked at least one OMT medication. Patients receiving OMT showed a significantly decreased occurrence of mortality (4.5% vs 15.1%, p < 0.001), re-AMI (4.2% vs 9.3%, p = 0.004), and the composite endpoint of death/re-AMI (8.6% vs 20.5%, p < 0.001) compared to those without OMT. No significant difference was observed between the groups regarding bleeding. After adjusting for confounding factors, OMT was the independent protective factor of 1-year mortality, while age was the independent risk factors. Conclusions: OMT at discharge was associated with a significantly lower 1-year mortality of patients with AMI and prior stroke in clinical practice. However, OMT was provided to just half of the eligible patients, leaving room for substantial improvement. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02466854
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".