MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318053819 · doi:10.1515/cclm-2022-1004

Using logistic regression models to investigate the effects of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T confounders on ruling in acute myocardial infarction

2023· article· en· W4318053819 on OpenAlexaffabout
Li Liu, Xueya Cai, Tanzy Love, Matthew Corsetti, Andrew Mathias, Andrew Worster, Jinhui Ma, Peter A. Kavsak

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster University
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionConfoundingMyocardial infarctionCohortReceiver operating characteristicInternal medicineArea under the curveCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Confounding factors, including sex, age, and renal dysfunction, affect high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) concentrations and the acute myocardial infarction (AMI) diagnosis. This study assessed the effects of these confounders through logistic regression models and evaluated the diagnostic performance of an optimized, integrated prediction model. METHODS: This retrospective study included a primary derivation cohort of 18,022 emergency department (ED) patients at a US medical center and a validation cohort of 890 ED patients at a Canadian medical center. Hs-cTnT was measured with 0/3 h sampling. The primary outcome was index AMI diagnosis. Logistic regression models were optimized to predict AMI using delta hs-cTnT and its confounders as covariates. The diagnostic performance of model cutoffs was compared to that of the hs-cTnT delta thresholds. Serial logistic regressions were carried out to evaluate the relationship between covariates. RESULTS: The area under the curve of the best-fitted model was 0.95. The model achieved a 90.0% diagnostic accuracy in the validation cohort. The optimal model cutoff yielded comparable performance (90.5% accuracy) to the optimal sex-specific delta thresholds (90.3% accuracy), with 95.8% agreement between the two diagnostic methods. Serial logistic regressions revealed that delta hs-cTnT played a more predominant role in AMI prediction than its confounders, among which sex is more predictive of AMI (total effect coefficient 1.04) than age (total effect coefficient 0.05) and eGFR (total effect coefficient -0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The integrated prediction model incorporating confounding factors does not outperform hs-cTnT delta thresholds. Sex-specific hs-cTnT delta thresholds remain to provide the highest diagnostic accuracy.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)Same topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207