MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction is associated with a high symptom burden and worse secondary prevention

2023· article· en· W4388595167 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elisha J. Hamilton, Joakim Alfredsson, Christina Christersson, David Erlinge, Krister Lindmark, Elmir Ömerovic, L D Desta, Tomas Jernberg, Christian Reitan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureMyocardial infarctionEjection fractionInternal medicineCardiologyQuality of life (healthcare)PopulationCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyPhysical therapyAngina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background LV dysfunction and symptomatic heart failure are common complications after myocardial infarction and the mortality and morbidity burden remain high in this population. Published data are becoming dated, and mainly focus on mortality and hospitalization burden. There is a lack of contemporary data describing patients with post-MI LV dysfunction in terms of symptom burden and secondary prevention measures. Purpose The purpose of this study was to describe patients with different degree of LV dysfunction after MI, their symptom burden, quality of life and adherence to recommended secondary prevention measures in a nationwide patient material. Methods We included 49,564 adults ≥18 years, registered in the SWEDEHEART registry between 2011 and 2018, diagnosed with acute MI, discharged alive and with no previous heart failure. The population was stratified by degree of LV systolic function; EF >50%, EF 40-49%, EF 30-39% and <30%, assessed by echocardiography. Patients were assessed at 6-10 weeks and 10-14 months after MI. Descriptive analyses were used for demographics and characteristics at baseline, first and second follow up. Uni- and multivariable regression analyses was used to examine the associations between LV impairment and symptoms, occupation/working status, readmissions, quality of life (Eq5D), attending cardiac rehabilitation and physical training, smoking status and snuffing. Results Patients with impaired LVEF would more often experience shortness of breath (5.6% vs 32.3% for EF < 30 vs EF >50 at second follow up) (figure). Patients with EF <30% had a lower Eq5D mean at first follow up than patients with normal LVEF (0.77 vs 0.82), but that difference was smaller at second follow-up (0.80 vs 0.83). Subjects with EF <30% did participate in heart rehabilitation to a lesser extent than those with normal EF, both at the first (28.7% vs 37.4%) as well as the second follow up (44.9% vs 55.5%). In multivariate regression analyses (table), a lower EF was associated with shortness of breath (OR = 7.47, 95% CI = 6.24-8.94) and a lower probability of working or studying (OR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.20 – 0.31) but not with chest pain. A lower EF was also associated with a lower probability of participating in heart school (OR = 0,67, 95% CI = 0.58-0.68) and physical training (OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.46-0.63). Conclusion Left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction is associated with a high symptom burden and worse secondary prevention. This may indicate heart rehabilitation programs should be better adapted to this large population with great needs.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicHeart Failure Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→