MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322732734 · doi:10.1093/ehjopen/oead018

Association of marital/partner status and patient-reported outcomes following myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4322732734 on OpenAlex
Cenjing Zhu, Phoebe Tran, Erica C Leifheit, Erica S. Spatz, Rachel P. Dreyer, Kate Nyhan, Shi‐Yi Wang, Judith H. Lichtman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal Open · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisAssociation (psychology)Myocardial infarctionMedicineSystematic reviewClinical psychologyPsychologyMEDLINEInternal medicinePsychotherapistBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Little is known about the relationship between marital/partner status and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following myocardial infarction (MI). We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis and explored potential sex differences. Methods and results We searched five databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) from inception to 27 July 2022. Peer-reviewed studies of MI patients that evaluated marital/partner status as an independent variable and reported its associations with defined PROMs were eligible for inclusion. Results for eligible studies were classified into four pre-specified outcome domains [health-related quality of life (HRQoL), functional status, symptoms, and personal recovery (i.e. self-efficacy, adherence, and purpose/hope)]. Study quality was appraised using Newcastle–Ottawa Scale, and data were synthesized by outcome domains. We conducted subgroup analysis by sex. We included 34 studies (n = 16 712), of which 11 were included in meta-analyses. Being married/partnered was significantly associated with higher HRQoL {six studies [n = 2734]; pooled standardized mean difference, 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.12–0.63], I2 = 51%} but not depression [three studies (n = 2005); pooled odds ratio, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.32–1.64); I2 = 65%] or self-efficacy [two studies (n = 356); pooled β, 0.03 (95% CI, −0.09 to 0.14); I2 = 0%]. The associations of marital/partner status with functional status, personal recovery outcomes, and symptoms of anxiety and fatigue were mixed. Sex differences were not evident due to mixed results from the available studies. Conclusions Married/partnered MI patients had higher HRQoL than unpartnered patients, but the associations with functional, symptom, and personal recovery outcomes and sex differences were less clear. Our findings inform better methodological approaches and standardized reporting to facilitate future research on these relationships.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.272 · 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