Clinical Profile of Young Women with CAD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most common cause of mortality in India.Deaths due to CAD occur 5-10 years earlier in the Indians than in Western countries.Coronary artery disease (CAD) in young women, who are previously considered as low risk group, is on rise now due to various reasons.This study is aimed to find out the incidence of CAD in young women admitted for evaluation of chest pain.Methods: The data of women suspected to have CAD and underwent CAG over a period of 2 years were retrospectively analyzed.The discharge summaries, coronary angiograms and angiogram reports were studied to get information about clinical and angiographic profiles of these women in the "young group" (age < 50 years)Results: Study showed normal epicardial coronaries in 174 (49.8 %) women, non-significant lesion in 80 (23.2%) women, and intermediate lesion in 21 (6%) women and obstructive CAD in 75 (21 %) women.There were 48 (15.77 %) women with SVD, 16 (3.15%) women with DVD, 11(2.8%)women with TVD.Conclusion: There is an alarming increase in the proportion of young women angiographically diagnosed to have significant coronary artery disease.The atherosclerotic burden is greater in elderly women than young women as understood from the higher prevalence of obstructive coronary artery disease in elderly group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".