MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393217741 · doi:10.1590/scielopreprints.8347

CORRELAÇÃO DA TROPONINA SANGUÍNEA E SALIVAR EM PACIENTES COM INFARTO AGUDO DO MIOCÁRDIO: ESTUDO PRELIMINAR

2024· preprint· pt· W4393217741 on OpenAlexaff
Flávia Kubrusly Arsego, Luiz Fernando Kubrusly, Douglas Mesadri Gewehr, Rafael Dib Possiedi, Paulo Afonso Nunes Nassif, Fernando Issamu Tabushi, Fernando Bermudez Kubrusly, Maria Luiza Ronkoski, Priscila Panassolo Cioato

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicHealthcare during COVID-19 Pandemic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introdução: Na ocorrência da lesão miocárdica, a identificação de biomarcadores constituintes da célula muscular cardíaca, em especial as troponinas, pode ser observada a partir de amostras de sangue e saliva. A preferência pela utilização da saliva como fluído diagnóstico é sustentada pela facilidade de obtenção a partir de método não invasivo e potencialmente pré-hospitalar. Objetivo: Verificar a expressão de troponina I do fluído salivar no infarto agudo do miocárdio em triagens de emergências e pré-hospitalares e correlacioná-la com os níveis plasmáticos da troponina I. Método: Estudo analítico transversal de teste diagnóstico em 27 pacientes, 9 mulheres e 18 homens, com confirmação diagnóstica de infarto agudo do miocárdio. Foram coletadas amostras de sangue e saliva armazenadas e transportadas em período de até 24 h para quantificação da troponina I. Resultados: O estudo demonstrou que 44,4% dos pacientes apresentaram positivação de troponina I em ambas as análises, com igualdade de resultados dicotômicos em 48,1% dos casos. Assim, o teste de troponina salivar obteve 48% de sensibilidade e 50% de especificidade. Conclusão: Foi possível identificar troponina I no fluido da saliva de pacientes em vigência de infarte agudo do miocárdio, mas a probabilidade de ela ter resultado falso positivo foi de 50% e de falso negativo de 52%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0070.018
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.010

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.286 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealthcare during COVID-19 PandemicFrench-language works237,207