Comment on Association of guideline-directed medical therapy adherence with outcomes after fractional flow reserve-based deferral of revascularization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of pharmacological management of patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) are to reduce angina symptoms and exercise-induced ischaemia, and to prevent cardiovascular events.1 Optimal treatment can be defined as the treatment that satisfactorily controls symptoms and prevents cardiac events associated with CCS, with maximal patient adherence and minimal adverse events. As stated in the 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline on CCS,1 there is no universal definition of an optimal pharmacological treatment in patients with CCS, and drug therapies must be adapted to each patient's characteristics and preferences. Initial drug therapy usually consists of one or two antianginal drugs, as necessary, plus drugs for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Whether combination therapy with two antianginal drugs is superior to monotherapy with any class of antianginal drug in reducing clinical events remains still unclear. The post hoc analysis of the J-CONFIRM registry [Long-Term Outcomes of Japanese...
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".