MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304974837 · doi:10.2196/41503

Coronary Artery Computed Tomography Angiography for Preventing Cardio-Cerebrovascular Disease: Observational Cohort Study Using the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics’ Common Data Model

2022· article· en· W4304974837 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Woo Kyung Bae, Ji-Hoon Cho, Seok Kim, Borham Kim, Hyunyoung Baek, Wongeun Song, Sooyoung Yoo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyMedicineCoronary artery diseaseInformaticsComputed tomographyRadiologyAngiographyComputed tomography angiographyCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardio-cerebrovascular diseases (CVDs) result in 17.5 million deaths annually worldwide, accounting for 46.2% of noncommunicable causes of death, and are the leading cause of death, followed by cancer, respiratory disease, and diabetes mellitus. Coronary artery computed tomography angiography (CCTA), which detects calcification in the coronary arteries, can be used to detect asymptomatic but serious vascular disease. It allows for noninvasive and quick testing despite involving radiation exposure. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to investigate the effectiveness of CCTA screening on CVD outcomes by using the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics' Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model (OMOP-CDM) data and the population-level estimation method. METHODS: Using electronic health record-based OMOP-CDM data, including health questionnaire responses, adults (aged 30-74 years) without a history of CVD were selected, and 5-year CVD outcomes were compared between patients undergoing CCTA (target group) and a comparison group via 1:1 propensity score matching. Participants were stratified into low-risk and high-risk groups based on the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk score and Framingham risk score (FRS) for subgroup analyses. RESULTS: The 2-year and 5-year risk scores were compared as secondary outcomes between the two groups. In total, 8787 participants were included in both the target group and comparison group. No significant differences (calibration P=.37) were found between the hazard ratios of the groups at 5 years. The subgroup analysis also revealed no significant differences between the ASCVD risk scores and FRSs of the groups at 5 years (ASCVD risk score: P=.97; FRS: P=.85). However, the CCTA group showed a significantly lower increase in risk scores at 2 years (ASCVD risk score: P=.03; FRS: P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Although we could not confirm a significant difference in the preventive effects of CCTA screening for CVDs over a long period of 5 years, it may have a beneficial effect on risk score management over 2 years.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207