MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 16279: Does the Number of Antianginals Influence Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Life in Stable Ischemic Heart Disease? Insights From the BARI2D Trial

2023· article· en· W4389956975 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yasser Jamil, Dae Yong Park, Luis More Verde, Matthew W. Sherwood, Behnam Tehrani, Wayne Batchelor, Kelly Epps-Anderson, Jennifer Frampton, Abdulla A. Damluji, Michael G. Nanna

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfoundingQuality of life (healthcare)Heart failureDiabetes mellitusRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineDiseaseClinical trialCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyCardiologyRevascularizationPhysical therapyAnginaMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Medical therapy is essential for managing stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD), including anti-anginals. remains unclear whether combining anti-anginal agents provides benefits beyond monotherapy in terms of QoL and cardiovascular outcomes. Hypothesis: The use of a single anti-anginal (β-Blockers, calcium channel blockers, or nitrates) is non-inferior to ≥2 anti-anginals Methods: We utilized data from the BARI-2D trial, which compared cardiovascular and QoL outcomes in patients with SIHD and diabetes mellitus (DM) randomized to revascularization with intensive medical therapy or intensive medical therapy alone. We categorized patients into three groups: ≥2 vs 1 vs 0 anti-anginals. We compared patient characteristics, QoL metrics, and cardiovascular endpoints at baseline and at 5 years, creating a multivariable model to adjust for key clinical confounders. Results: Among 2,368 patients, 348 patients (14.7%) were on 0 anti-anginals, 1,020 patients (43.1%) were on 1 anti-anginal, and 1,000 patients (42.2%) were on ≥2 anti-anginals at baseline. The most common anti-anginal class was β-Blockers. At baseline, patients on 0 anti-anginals had better QoL metrics than patients on ≥2 anti-anginals. However, at a 1-year follow-up, patients taking only 1 anti-anginal showed greater QoL improvement than those taking 0 anti-anginal; this superiority in QoL metrics was not seen in patients taking ≥2 anti-anginal agent, even after adjusting for multiple covariates such as age, heart failure, diabetes control and myocardial jeopardy index. (Figure 1) Lastly, at 5-year follow-up, after adjustment, there were no differences in all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, or myocardial infarction between patients taking different numbers of anti-anginals. Conclusion: Treating adults with SIHD and DM with a single anti-anginal was at least as effective in improving QoL compared to two or more anti-anginal agents at one year of follow-up.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→