MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399677728 · doi:10.1093/eurjpc/zwae175.082

Different trends in the age-standardized incidence of ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the province of Quebec, Canada between 2013 and 2021

2024· article· en· W4399677728 on OpenAlexaffabout
Claudia Blais, Linda Khadraoui, Julie Riopel‐Meunier, Louis Rochette

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Preventive Cardiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionPopulationIncidence (geometry)PandemicConfidence intervalDemographyEpidemiologyMortality rateInternal medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseEnvironmental healthInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Age-standardized incident trends in coronary heart disease (CHD) have shown a significant decline of 15% between 2013 and 2021 in the province of Quebec, Canada. The effect of the pandemic years has shown that ratios of the observed on expected age-standardized incident rates of CHD were slightly lower for 2020-2021, the first year of the pandemic whereas it was non-significant for 2021-2022, the second year of the pandemic. Purpose To describe how incident trends in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and specifically between 2 subtypes: ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) have contributed to the decrease observed in CHD between 2013 and 2021, which includes 2 years of pandemic. Methods Using linked health administrative data for the whole population aged ≥20 years, starting in 1996 and updated annually, incident AMI were attributed if the International Classification of Disease tenth revision (ICD-10) code I21 was present in the hospital data, as a primary or in any secondary positions. STEMI and NSTEMI were defined with the presence of the ICD-10 code R94.30 and R94.31, respectively, in the hospital data in any secondary position. The 2011 Quebec standard population was used for age-standardization and 99% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the gamma method. The temporal differences were considered to be significant if the CIs did not overlap. Results Crude incident rate of AMI was 3.17 per 1,000 in 2021. This included 0.64 per 1,000 for STEMI and 2.41 per 1,000 for NSTEMI, corresponding to 20,810 AMI, of which 4,280 were STEMI and 16,085 were NSTEMI (445 AMI were unclassified). The proportions of STEMI and NSTEMI between 2013 and 2021 were stable with a mean of 23% and 75%, respectively. Between 2013 and 2021, age-standardized incidence rates of AMI were stable with 2.78 per 1,000, [99% CI: 2.73-2.84] and 2.80 per 1,000, [2.75-2.85], respectively (Figure 1). However, different significant trends were observed: there was an 8% increase in incidence rates until 2018 (3.01 per 1,000, [2.96-3.06]) followed by a decrease, and then a notable increase in 2021. As illustrated in figure 1, a constant and significant decrease of 15% in the age-standardized incidence of STEMI was observed between 2013 (0.68 per 1,000, [0.66-0.71]) and 2021 (0.58 per 1,000, [0.56-0.60]) whereas NSTEMI increased globally of 11% between the same years (1.85 per 1,000, [1.81-1.90] and 2.06 per 1,000, [2.02-2.10]) and followed a similar trend as all AMI. Conclusion The decrease in the incidence of CHD could be attributed to the decrease in STEMI only since NSTEMI increased globally between 2013 and 2021 which explains the non-significant changes in the incident trends of all AMI. This suggests that public health efforts might have more effectively addressed factors leading to STEMI, as opposed to NSTEMI. The pandemic seems to have had varied impacts on different AMI subtypes.

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)0.000
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 score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Preventive CardiologySame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207