MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294292791 · doi:10.33678/cor.2022.079

(Optimizing Foundational Therapies in Patients With HFrEF. How Do We Translate These Findings Into Clinical Care? Translation of the document prepared by the Czech Society of Cardiology)

2022· article· en· W4294292791 on OpenAlexaff
Filip Málek, Miloš Táborský

Bibliographic record

VenueCor et Vasa · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineContext (archaeology)Gynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vzhledem k vysokĂŠmu riziku neŞådoucĂ­ch účinkĹŻ u pacientĹŻ se srdečnĂ­m selhĂĄnĂ­m a snĂ­Ĺženou ejekčnĂ­ frakcĂ­ (heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, HFrEF) existuje nalĂŠhavĂĄ potřeba zahĂĄjenĂ­ a titrace farmakoterapie podle doporučenĂ˝ch postupĹŻ (guideline-directed medical therapy, GDMT), kterĂĄ mĹŻĹže snĂ­Ĺžit morbiditu a riziko ĂşmrtĂ­. DoporučenĂŠ postupy pro klinickou praxi nynĂ­ zdĹŻrazňujĂ­ nutnost včasnĂŠho a rychlĂŠho zahĂĄjenĂ­ léčby lĂĄtkami s kardiovaskulĂĄrnĂ­m přínosem. Při vědomĂ­ četnĂ˝ch překĂĄĹžek ztěžujĂ­cĂ­ch zahĂĄjenĂ­ a optimalizaci GDMT musĂ­ bĂ˝t cĂ­lem poskytovatelĹŻ zdravotnĂ­ péče uvĂĄdět do praxe čtyři pilíře farmakoterapie kombinacĂ­ čtyř lĂŠkovĂ˝ch skupin, kterou dnes preferuje větĹĄina doporučenĂ˝ch postupĹŻ pro klinickou praxi: inhibitory receptoru pro angiotenzin II a neprilysinu, beta-blokĂĄtory, antagonisty mineralokortikoidnĂ­ch receptorĹŻ a inhibitory sodĂ­ko-glukĂłzovĂŠho kotransportĂŠru 2. I kdyĹž u vysokĂŠho procenta pacientĹŻ s HFrEF nejsou přítomny ŞådnĂŠ klinickĂŠ kontraindikace GDMT, přesto jim tato léčiva nejsou předepisovĂĄna. VčasnĂŠ zahĂĄjenĂ­ kombinačnĂ­ léčby s nĂ­zkĂ˝mi dĂĄvkami by měla snĂĄĹĄet větĹĄina pacientĹŻ. Při hledĂĄnĂ­ maximĂĄlnĂ­ tolerovanĂŠ GDMT bude nicmĂŠně nutno zvaĹžovat i faktory na straně pacientĹŻ, jako jsou jejich hemodynamickĂŠ poměry, křehkost a laboratornĂ­ hodnoty. DalĹĄĂ­ vĂ˝znamnou moĹžnost pro ĂşspěšnĂŠ provĂĄděnĂ­ GDMT představuje zahĂĄjenĂ­ GDMT během hospitalizace pro akutnĂ­ srdečnĂ­ selhĂĄnĂ­. Pro omezenĂ­ polypragmazie a snĂ­ĹženĂ­ rizika neŞådoucĂ­ch účinkĹŻ lze konečně zvaĹžovat i vysazenĂ­ léčiv bez zjevnĂŠho přínosu pro kardiovaskulĂĄrnĂ­ systĂŠm. SnĂ­ĹženĂ­ morbidity a mortality pacientĹŻ s HFrEF si vyŞådĂĄ dalĹĄĂ­ prospektivnĂ­ studie zaměřenĂŠ na optimĂĄlnĂ­ provĂĄděnĂ­ farmakoterapie čtyřkombinacĂ­. (J Am Coll Cardiol Basic Trans Science 2022;7:504-517) © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Jde o člĂĄnek vydanĂ˝ pod licencĂ­ CC BY-NC-ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). ISSN 2452-302X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacbts.2021.10.018

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 score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCor et VasaSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207