MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229066296 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2022.04.010

Nationwide Study of Sex Differences in Incident Heart Failure in Newly Diagnosed Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

2022· article· en· W4229066296 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Haran Yogasundaram, Sunjidatul Islam, Douglas C. Dover, Nathaniel M. Hawkins, Justin A. Ezekowitz, Padma Kaul, Roopinder K. Sandhu

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationHazard ratioInternal medicineProportional hazards modelConfidence intervalHeart failureStroke (engine)Cardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Heart failure (HF) is a leading complication of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), and the presence of both conditions worsens prognosis. Sex-specific associations between NVAF and outcomes focus on stroke; less is known about HF. We evaluated sex differences in incident HF in NVAF. Methods We identified adults age ≥ 65 years hospitalized for incident NVAF without prior HF from April 2010 to March 2018 in Canada. The primary outcome was incident HF hospitalization, with a secondary composite outcome of incident HF hospitalization or all-cause mortality at 1 year. Cox proportional hazard regression models were constructed for the association between sex and outcomes, adjusting for age, comorbidities, socioeconomic status, cardioversion, and medications. Results Of 68,909 NVAF patients, 53.8% were women. Women had a higher rate of the primary outcome (30.0% vs 25.6%, P < 0.001) and the composite outcome (39.5% vs 36.6%, P < 0.001) than men. In multivariable analysis without adjusting for medications, there was an 8% increase risk of HF (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.11, P < 0.001) for women, which was attenuated when accounting for medication (hazard ratio [HR] 1.01, 95% CI 0.98-1.04). After full adjustment, women age ≥ 75 years were at higher risk of the primary outcome (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.13, P < 0.001) and the composite outcome (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07, P < 0.001), compared with men, whereas there was a significantly lower risk for those age 65-75 years. Conclusions In this nationwide study of incident NVAF without HF, women age ≥ 75 years were more likely to develop HF or die than men. Strategies to prevent HF in older women with NVAF are needed.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207