Novel scoring system based on clinical examination for prediction of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome patients: a retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aims to develop PADjadjaran Mortality in Acute coronary syndrome (PADMA) Score to predict in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients based on clinical examination only. Additionally, we also compared the predictive value of the PADMA Score with the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE), Canada Acute Coronary Syndrome (C-ACS), and The Portuguese Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes (ProACS) risk scores. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all ACS patients aged≥18 years who were admitted to Dr. Hasan Sadikin Central General Hospital from January 2018 to January 2022. Patients' demographic, comorbidities and clinical presentation data were collected and analysed using multivariate logistic regression to create two models of scoring system (probability and cut-off model) to predict in-hospital all-cause mortality. The area under the curve (AUC) among PADMA, GRACE, C-ACS and ProACS risk scores was compared using the fisher Z test. RESULTS: Multivariate regression analysis of 1359 patients showed that older age, history of cerebrovascular disease, tachycardia, high Shock Index and Killip class III and IV were independent mortality predictors and included in the PADMA Score. PADMA Score ranged from 0 to 20, with a score≥5 that can predict all-cause mortality with 82.78% sensitivity and 72.35% specificity. The difference in AUC between PADMA and GRACE scores was insignificant (p=0.126). Moreover, the AUC of the PADMA Score was significantly higher compared with the C-ACS (p=0.002) and ProACS risk scores (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: PADMA Score is a simple scoring system to predict in-hospital mortality in ACS patients. PADMA Score≥5 showed an accurate discriminative capability to predict in-hospital mortality, comparable with the GRACE Score and superior to C-ACS and ProACS scores.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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, 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".