MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 12692: Central Sensitization in Women With Ischemia and No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: A Pilot Study

2022· article· en· W4380794442 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Esha Dave, Sneha Thandra, Daniel Harper, Vinita Singh, Avni Ahuja, Ana García León, Arielle Schwartz, Fauzia Rashid, Laura P. Kimble, Puja K. Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnginaInternal medicineCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyChest painBody mass indexCardiologyDepression (economics)Coronary artery diseaseQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Myocardial ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) is more common in women and associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. INOCA patients have recurrent chest pain and reduced quality of life, and therapeutic strategies are poorly defined. Central nervous system factors can promote and maintain spontaneous clinical pain. We explored central sensitization in INOCA. Methods: Twenty-nine women diagnosed with INOCA based on coronary angiography were enrolled. Baseline demographics, risk factors, and angina burden by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) was assessed. Generalized pain hypersensitivity was assessed using the validated Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), with scores ≥40 indicating the presence of central sensitization. Functional capacity was determined by Duke Activity Status Index (DASI). A DASI score ≤34 is prognostic of major adverse cardiac events. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlations were performed; p-value ≤.05 was considered significant. Results: Mean age was 55.4±10 years and body mass index (BMI) was 30.1±7 kg/m 2 . Cardiac risk factors were prevalent with 59% hypertension, 55% hyperlipidemia, and 21% diabetes. SAQ scores indicated a high angina burden: 49.3±25.7 (angina frequency) and 39.3±27.6 (angina stability). Mean CSI score was 40.5±17, and 62% had CSI scores ≥40, indicating central sensitization. Mean DASI score was 33.3±18.6. A majority (52%) had a DASI score ≤34, indicative of guarded prognosis. CSI scores correlated positively with depression (r=0.78, p=0.00001) and BMI (r=0.39, p=0.04), and negatively with DASI (r=-0.36, p=0.05), indicating impaired physical functioning in those with higher levels of central pain sensitivity. Conclusions: Nearly two-thirds of women with INOCA have central sensitization. Central pain amplification is associated with angina, depression, obesity, and a limited functional capacity in mid-life INOCA women. The role of the central nervous system in persistent chest pain should be further investigated and may lead to novel therapeutic strategies.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→