Abstract 9976: Contrasting Mortality Trends of Aortic Emergency: Dissection and Rupture in the UK, Japan, USA, and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Aortic dissection and aneurysm rupture are aortic emergencies. Surgical outcomes and interventional procedures have improved over the past two decades; however, whether this has translated into lower mortality across countries remains an open question. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that given improved surgical mortality, there will be improvement in mortality from aortic dissection and rupture in the UK, Japan, USA, and Canada. Methods: We analyzed the WHO mortality database to determine trends in mortality from aortic dissection and rupture in 4 countries from 2000 to 2019. Crude mortality rate and age-standardized mortality rate per 100,000 persons were calculated, and annual percentage change was estimated using joinpoint regression. Results: In 2019, crude and age-standardized mortality rates from aortic dissection were 2.15 and 1.04 in UK, 8.67 and 2.66 in Japan, 1.21 and 0.76 in USA, and 1.30 and 0.67 in Canada, respectively. In 2019, crude and age-standardized mortality rates from aortic rupture were 4.86 and 1.80 in UK, 5.22 and 1.16 in Japan, 1.04 and 0.52 in USA, and 1.99 and 0.81 in Canada, respectively. There was a significantly decreasing trend in age-standardized mortality from aortic aneurysm rupture in all 4 countries over the study period, and a decreasing trend in age-standardized mortality from aortic dissection in the UK over the study period, in USA until 2010, and in Canada until 2012. There was a significantly increasing trend in mortality from aortic dissection in Japan over the study period, in the USA after 2010, and in Canada after 2012. Joinpoint regression identified significant changes in the trends from decreasing to increasing in USA and Canada. In sensitivity analyses stratified by sex, similar trends were observed. Conclusions: Trends in mortality from aortic aneurysm rupture are decreasing, however, mortality from aortic dissection is increasing in Japan, USA, and Canada. Further study to explain these trends is warranted.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".