MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of Ethylmethylhydroxypyridine in Patients Presenting with Myocardial Infarction: Antiischemic, Antidepressant, Anxiolytic Effects

2016· article· en· W4200090392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maryna Dolzhenko, Olena Popovich, Oksana Shershnyova, Oleksandr O. Nudchenko, К. С. Фарадж, Yana Djachenko, Liudmyla Yakovenko

Bibliographic record

VenueFamily Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHamilton Anxiety Rating ScaleTolerabilityInternal medicineCardiologyCoronary artery diseaseAnxiolyticMyocardial infarctionAcute coronary syndromeMontreal Cognitive AssessmentAnxietyST segmentDepression (economics)AnesthesiaDiseaseAdverse effectCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective: to evaluate the efficiency of ethylmethylhydroxypyridine (Mexiprim, STADA Arzneimittel AG, Germany) in patients presenting with myocardial infarction at hospital and outpatient stage. Patients and methods. The study included 59 patients with coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndrome with ST1segment elevation in the first day of admission to the ICU, AH, 3-stage, 2 degrees, HF. To all patients basic therapy according to current ESH/ESC guidelines was prescribed. To 39 patients additionally intravenous infusion of 200 mg of mexiprim o.d. for 10 days, followed by 125 mg per os three times a day for next 60 days was administered. Another 20 patients presented control group and received only basic therapy. The study design included: 24-hour Holter monitoring to estimate the dynamics of changes in the ST segment, cardiac arrhythmias and heart rate variability, evaluation by the scale of Beck, Hamilton scale for the assessment of anxiety (HARS) and depression (HDRS), the common blood and urine tests, biochemical blood analysis, evaluation of therapeutic tolerability conducted before treatment and 60 days after treatment. Surveys on a scale SAN, assessment of cognitive impairment on the MMSE scale were performed on the 60th day of treatment. Efficiency criteria were: a 50% reduction of cardiac arrhythmias, a decrease in ischemia, a decrease by 50% or more from baseline average score by HARS, HDRS scales, dynamics of the mental state questionnaire and less than 9 points on a scale of depression, reducing in SAN scale score. Results. In pаtients of mexiprim group significant reduction of depression scores by 62% were observed. According to the dynamics of the mental state questionnaire patients of mexiprim group reported feeling better, that is, reduction of score by 45% . According to the Hamilton scale for the assessment of anxiety (HARS), in particular mental anxiety – decrease in the total score of 65%, somatic anxiety – by 35.5%, and a total of 50% were revealed. In the group of patients receiving additionally intravenous Mexiprim for 10 days significantly reduced the number of single and group PACs, as well as single and multiple PVCs, not only in comparison with these parameters before the treatment, but also in comparison with the control group. In patients treated with Mexiprim no evidence of residual ischaemia were noted, but in the control group statistically significant segment depression ST remained. Heart rate variability was not significantly changed in the control group, but increased in patients who received Mexiprim. Conclusion. Use of Mexiprim in patients with myocardial infarction reduces ST segment depression, amount of ventricular and supraventricular arrhythmias, improved heart rate variability, and the state of anxiety and depression.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFamily MedicineSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207