International Perspectives on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Adherence to Prescribed Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Window Into Acute Cardiovascular Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An international panel of expert clinicians and researchers in acute cardiac care was convened to review, describe, and contextualize their varied experiences delivering care and maintaining ongoing research during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. A proposed perspective from which care and outcomes could be viewed was the possibility that without routine follow-up and as-accustomed interactions with their care team, patients at risk of acute atherothrombotic events might be less adherent to prescribed antiplatelet medications. This might be manifested by more emergency coronary events or by an increased (and perhaps unidentifiable) incidence of out-of-hospital cardiovascular deaths related to patient anxiety about presenting to hospital during the pandemic. The experiences of the panel members were similar in many regards, which identified opportunities for improvement in cardiac care the next time there is a substantial disruption of usual practice. Regardless of geography or payor system, there was an identified need for better remote care platforms; but stronger infrastructure and consumer facility with remote care technology, improved provider-patient communication to help ensure adherence to primary and secondary prevention medications, and longer-term prescription fills and no-hassle refills on such medications. Profound disruptions in acute cardiovascular research highlighted the need for redundancy or back-up planning for teams engaged in time-sensitive research, to ensure both continuity of protocols and patient safety.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".