Diferenças entre os Sexos nos Desfechos de Pacientes com Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnivelamento do Segmento ST Submetidos à Intervenção Coronária Percutânea Primária
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown that women are usually undertreated and have worse outcomes after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), hence the need to investigate questions related to sex in Brazil to better deal with the problem. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether female sex is still associated with adverse events in a contemporary cohort of patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of STEMI patients submitted to pPCI in a tertiary university hospital between March 2011 and December 2021. Patients were categorized into groups based on their sex at birth. The primary clinical outcome was long-term MACCE. Patients were followed-up for up to five years. All hypothesis tests had a two-sided significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: Among 1457 patients admitted with STEMI in the study period, 1362 were included and 468 (34.4%) were women. Female patients had a higher prevalence of hypertension (73% vs. 60%, p <0.001), diabetes (32% vs. 25%, p=0.003) and Killip class 3-4 at hospital admission (17% vs. 12%, p=0.01); TIMI risk score was higher among women (4 [2, 6] vs. 3 [2, 5], p<0.001). In-hospital mortality was not different between groups (12.8% vs. 10.5%, p=0.20). In-hospital MACCE (16.0% vs. 12.6%, p=0.085) and long-term MACCE (28.7% vs. 24.4%, p=0.089) were numerically higher in women, with borderline significance. After multivariate analysis, female sex was not associated with MACCE (HR = 1.14; 95% CI 0.86 - 1.51; p = 0.36). CONCLUSION: In a prospective cohort of STEMI patients submitted to pPCI, female patients were older and had more comorbidities at baseline, but no significant differences were found in terms of long-term adverse outcomes.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".