MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393359203 · doi:10.1016/j.ahjo.2024.100390

Arterial stiffness assessment in coronary microvascular dysfunction and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: An initial report from the WISE-CVD continuation study

2024· article· en· W4393359203 on OpenAlexaff
Panteha Rezaeian, Chrisandra Shufelt, Janet Wei, Christine Pacheco, Galen Cook‐Wiens, Daniel S. Berman, Balaji Tamarappoo, Louise Thomson, Michael D. Nelson, R.D. Anderson, John W. Petersen, Eileen Handberg, Carl J. Pepine, C. Noel Bairey Merz

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Heart Journal Plus Cardiology Research and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineEjection fractionArterial stiffnessHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionCoronary artery diseaseHeart failurePulse wave velocityCardiac magnetic resonance imagingMagnetic resonance imagingBlood pressureRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is the most common cardiac complication in patients with coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD), yet its underlying pathways remain unclear. Aortic pulse-wave velocity (aPWV) is an indicator of large artery stiffness and a predictor for cardiovascular disease. However, aPWV in CMD and HFpEF is not well characterized and may provide understanding of disease progression. Among participants without obstructive coronary artery disease, we evaluated 51 women with suspected CMD and 20 women and men with evidence of HFpEF. All participants underwent aPWV measurement (SphygmoCor, Atcor Medical) with higher aPWV indicating greater vascular stiffness. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) assessed left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, CMD via myocardial perfusion reserve index (MPRI), and ventricular remodeling via LV mass-volume ratio. . Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon rank sum tests, Pearson correlations and linear regression analysis. Compared to the suspected CMD group, the HFpEF participants were older (65 ± 12 vs 56 ± 11 yrs., p = 0.002) had higher BMI (31.0 ± 4.3 vs 27.8 ± 6.7 kg/m2, p = 0.013), higher aPWV (10.5 ± 2.0 vs 8.0 ± 1.6 m/s, p = 0.05) and lower MPRI (1.5 ± 0.3 vs1.8 ± 0.3, p = 0.02), but not remodeling. In a model adjusted for cardiovascular risk factors, the HFpEF group had a lower LVEF (estimate −4.78, p = 0.0437) than the suspected CMD group. HFpEF participants exhibit greater arterial stiffness and lower myocardial perfusion reserve, with lower LVEF albeit not remodeling, compared to suspected CMD participants. These findings suggest arterial stiffness may contribute to progression from CMD to HFpEF. Prospective work is needed and ongoing.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Heart Journal Plus Cardiology Research and PracticeSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207