MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396827964 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2023-0414

Coronary microvascular disease in women: epidemiology, mechanisms, evaluation, and treatment

2024· review· en· W4396827964 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rebecca Steinberg, Anamaria Dragan, Puja K. Mehta, Olga Toleva

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyCoronary artery diseaseFractional flow reserveMicrocirculationInternal medicineAnginaIschemiaDiseaseCoronary flow reserveEndothelial dysfunctionPathophysiologyCoronary circulationMyocardial perfusion imagingMyocardial infarctionBlood flowCoronary angiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) involves functional or structural abnormalities of the coronary microvasculature resulting in dysregulation of coronary blood flow (CBF) in response to myocardial oxygen demand. This perfusion mismatch causes myocardial ischemia, which manifests in patients as microvascular angina (MVA). CMD can be diagnosed non-invasively via multiple imaging techniques or invasively using coronary function testing (CFT), which assists in determining the specific mechanisms involving endothelium-independent and dependent epicardial and microcirculation domains. Unlike traditional coronary artery disease (CAD), CMD can often occur in patients without obstructive atherosclerotic epicardial disease, which can make the diagnosis of CMD difficult. Moreover, MVA due to CMD is more prevalent in women and carries increased risk of future cardiovascular events. Successful treatment of symptomatic CMD is often patient-specific risk factor and endotype targeted. This article aims to review newly identified mechanisms and novel treatment strategies for managing CMD, and outline sex-specific differences in the presentation and pathophysiology of the disease.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207