Antithrombotic Management and Outcomes of Anterior ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction With New-Onset Wall Motion Abnormalities in Men and Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In patients with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and new-onset antero-apical wall motion abnormalities (WMAs), whether the rate of prophylaxis against left ventricular thrombus and outcomes differ between men and women is unknown. Methods: A multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients with STEMI and new-onset antero-apical WMAs treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention was conducted. Patients with an established indication of oral anticoagulation (OAC) were excluded. The rates of triple therapy (double antiplatelet therapy + OAC) at discharge were compared for women vs men. The rates of net adverse clinical events, a composite of mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke or transient ischemic attack, systemic thromboembolism or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding at 6 months were compared across sex using a multivariate logistic regression model. Results: = 0.11). At 6 months, 33 women (8.2%) and 96 men (7.6%) experienced a net adverse clinical event (adjusted odds ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.49-1.37). No difference occurred in the risk of bleeding events and ischemic events between men and women, when these were analyzed separately. Conclusions: The rates of OAC prescription for left ventricular thrombus prophylaxis and clinical outcomes at 6 months were similar in women and men following anterior STEMI with new-onset antero-apical WMAs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".