MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242546505 · doi:10.1111/acem.12048

In Reply

2013· letter· en· W4242546505 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Honarmand, Mohammad Jalili, Zia Hejripour, Nasim Pourtabatabaei

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChest painAcute coronary syndromeMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineTroponinCardiologyEmergency departmentProspective cohort studyTroponin ICoronary artery disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We thank Dr. Christenson for his attention to our article entitled “Validation of the Vancouver Chest Pain Rule: A Prospective Cohort Study” recently published in Academic Emergency Medicine. Dr. Christenson pointed out to two differences in the methodology between the original1 and the validation2 studies. The diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in our study was established according to the criteria consistent with universal definition of myocardial infarction (MI) and the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association criteria.3, 4 As we described in our article,2 creatine kinase myocardial band isoenzyme (CK-MB) was the most available cardiac biomarker during the first hours of presentation for patients with acute chest pain; however, our physicians order both troponin and CK-MB for all patients with suspected ACS routinely. In the original study by Christenson et al.,1 we observed more emphasis on applying CK-MB level to identify very-low-risk patients compared to troponin level. This issue is clearly recognizable in the decision-making algorithm they suggested, where CK-MB is the only discriminating factor for patients 40 years of age and older. We also agree with the comment that high levels of troponin may be caused by several and even noncardiac conditions; however, two of our patients with normal initial ECG and CK-MB and abnormally high initial troponin underwent angiography and were diagnosed with two-vessel coronary disease. The cutoff for an upper limit of normal of 3.77 ng/mL for females and 6.73 ng/mL for males is according to Roche CARDIAC CK-MB technical specification, and also at the 99th percentile of our reference population for diagnosis of ACS, MI, and assessment of reinfarction, which must be matched with the cutoff point of three selected in the original study using Biosite Triahge cardiac panel. However, initial normal CK-MB levels of above-mentioned patients with abnormally high troponin levels of 0.259 and 0.204 μg/L were 2.37 and 3.4 ng/mL, respectively (both were male). We also aim to conduct a similar study in a multicenter setting using troponin as the main marker. We hope that future studies regarding this and other clinical prediction rules would provide an appropriate tool to help clinicians make confident decisions when facing the challenge of dealing with a patient with apparently low-risk chest pain.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0190.033
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.031

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Emergency MedicineSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207