MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321792642 · doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2023.02.008

Association of Diabetes Mellitus and Its Types with In-Hospital Management and Outcomes of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

2023· article· en· W4321792642 on OpenAlexaff
Priyanka Sethupathi, Andrija Matetić, Vijay Bang, Phyo Kyaw Myint, Ivan Rendon, Rodrigo Bagur, Carlos Diaz‐Arocutipa, Alejandro Ricalde, Aditya Bharadwaj, Mamas A. Mamas

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular revascularization medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionPercutaneous coronary interventionDiabetes mellitusConfidence intervalType 2 Diabetes MellitusStroke (engine)CardiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is an important risk factor for adverse outcomes following acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but large-scale studies investigating the differential impact of Type 1 DM (T1DM) and Type 2 DM (T2DM) on AMI outcomes are lacking. METHODS: All adult discharges for AMI in the National Inpatient Sample (October 2015 to December 2018) were included and stratified into T1DM, T2DM and non-DM (NDM) groups. Outcomes of interests were all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), major bleeding and acute ischemic stroke, as well as invasive management. Binomial hierarchical multilevel multivariable logistic regression with adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) was used to investigate the association between DM and its subtypes with the AMI outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 2,587,615 patients, there were 29,250 (1.1 %) T1DM and 1,032,925 (39.9 %) T2DM patients. After multivariable adjustment, patients with T1DM had increased odds of MACCE (aOR 1.20, 95 % CI 1.09-1.31), all-cause mortality (aOR 1.20, 95 % CI 1.08-1.33) and major bleeding (aOR 1.28, 95 % CI 1.13-1.44), whilst T2DM patients had increased odds of MACCE (aOR 1.03, 95 % CI 1.01-1.05) and ischemic stroke (aOR 1.09, 95 % CI 1.05-1.13), compared to NDM patients. The adjusted odds of receiving percutaneous coronary intervention were lower in both T1DM and T2DM patients (aOR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.66-0.75 and aOR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.94-0.96, respectively), but T2DM patients showed higher utilization of composite percutaneous and surgical revascularization (aOR 1.03, 95 % CI 1.03-1.04) compared to NDM patients. CONCLUSIONS: DM patients presenting with AMI have worse in-hospital clinical outcomes compared to NDM patients. There are important DM type-related differences with T1DM patients having overall worse outcomes and receiving less overall revascularization.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiovascular revascularization medicineSame topicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patientsFrench-language works237,207