MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 16624: Patients’ Perspectives on the Impact and Management of Angina - Preliminary Results of the PACT-ANGINA International Survey

2023· article· en· W4389944990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Giuseppe Rosano, Maria George, Juan Carlos Kaski, M.D. M. IBRAHEM SARAH Y. ABDELAZIZ, Jabir Abdullakutty, Rajeev Agarwala, Francois Christory, Filippo Crea, Nabil Farag, Luís Henrique Wolff Gowdak, Martha Gulati, Gustavo Méndez, Dalton B Percoma, J D Sierra Lara Martinez

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnginaQuality of life (healthcare)DyslipidemiaPercutaneous coronary interventionChest painCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyPhysical therapyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionNursingDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: PACT-ANGINA is a quality improvement initiative aimed to improve the understanding of challenges in the management of angina and chronic coronary syndromes. Hypothesis: An international patient survey is conducted to assess how angina and its management affect patients’ lives and what patients want in terms of the management of their angina. Methods: A working group that included 9 cardiologists and 7 patient representatives developed an online, anonymous questionnaire. Patients with angina were invited to take part in the survey by patient organizations and treating physicians. Results: Between January and June 2023, the survey was completed by 891 patients in 21 countries. The proportion of female patients was 46%. Among participants, 57% had been diagnosed with angina for 2 years or less, and 54% had never undergone a percutaneous coronary intervention. The proportion of patients with no history of smoking was 65% and the most common self-reported concomitant diseases were hypertension (49%), diabetes (38%) and dyslipidemia (23%). Pain, tightness, pressure or discomfort in the chest (89%), shortness of breath (44%), and fatigue (39%) were the most frequently reported symptoms, and 34% of participants felt that their physical activities were very or extremely limited by angina symptoms. The proportion of respondents who felt that angina was having a great or extreme impact on their quality of life was 37%. When asked to rate the relative importance of 9 treatment objectives, respondents assigned the highest priority to 1) reducing angina attacks and symptoms, 2) avoiding hospitalizations, and 3) prolonging their life as much as possible. Among different aspects of care, those considered the most important by respondents to improve the management of their angina were 1) a better follow-up of their symptoms, 2) practical and easy-to-understand information, and 3) lifestyle changes counseling. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that patients with angina are often limited by their symptoms, which impact their quality of life. Patient-centered management of angina is necessary to improve clinical care of such a common cardiac condition.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→