ONE-YEAR OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH CORONARY HEART DISEASE WITH PROGRESSIVE ATHEROSCLEROSIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Вackground. Progressive atherosclerosis syndrome, in contrast to spontaneous one, is accompanied by a more severe course and frequent complications. Therefore, it is crucial to define the risk stratification criteria and treatment of such patients. Purpose of the study to study one-year outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease with progressive atherosclerosis. Patient Characterization and Research Methods. The study included 202 patients with confirmed diagnosis of CHD: 147 men and 55 women. The mean age of the patients was (53,3 ± 7,16) years. The main group (100 patients) included those who had two (or more) additional cardiovascular events from the following in the two years before the study: MI or unstable angina pectoris, emergency artery stenting, stroke, peripheral artery thrombosis, critical ischemia or lower limb amputation, and the comparison group included 102 patients with CHD without such events. After 12 months from the time of inclusion, end points were evaluated. Statistical Analysis Methods. Microsoft Office Excel 2019 program was used. Results. The work revealed that patients with progressive atherosclerosis have worse long-term (one-year) prognosis in comparison with its spontaneous course; a significant influence on unfavorable outcomes is exerted by: Angina of any EF without surgical treatment - OR 4.125 (1.213; 14.027), multivessel coronary artery disease - OR 3.929, CI (1.156-13.350), C-reactive protein level 5 mg/L or higher - OR 18.667, CI (4.684-74.393).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".