MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405377841 · doi:10.1016/j.jacadv.2024.101443

Propensity Score Analysis of Possible Medication Effects on Outcomes in Patients With Systemic Right Ventricles

2024· article· en· W4405377841 on OpenAlexaff
Amrit Misra, Carla P. Rodríguez-Monserrate, Kimberlee Gauvreau, Mikael Dellborg, Flavia Fusco, Tripti Gupta, Joseph Kay, Shelby Kutty, Robert M. Kauling, Jeremy Nicolarsen, Jolien W. Roos‐Hesselink, Anitha S. John, Joshua Wong, Luke J. Burchill, Eric V. Krieger, Adam M. Lubert, Pastora Gallego, Marissa C. Kuo, Jamil Aboulhosn, Jonathan Cramer, Petra Antonová, David W. Baker, Payam Dehghani, Alexander R. Opotowsky, Alexandra van Dissel, Jasmine Grewal, Elizabeth Yeung, Susan M. Fernandes, Salil Ginde, Paul Khairy, Frank Han, Isabelle Vonder Muhll, William Wilson, W. Aaron Kay, Stephen Pylypchuk, Berardo Sarubbi, Clare O’Donnell, Fred H. Rodriguez, P. Jayadeva, David S. Celermajer, Sangeeta Shah, Timothy B. Cotts, Christopher DeZorzi, Anthony Magalski, Anne Marie Valente, Craig S. Broberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Advances · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of AlbertaMontreal Heart InstituteSt. Paul's HospitalRegina General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropensity score matchingMedicineInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Patients with systemic right ventricle (SRV), either d-transposition of the great arteries following an atrial switch procedure or congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries, develop severe right ventricular dysfunction, prompting appropriate medical therapy. However, the efficacy of beta-blockers and angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) in SRV patients is unproven. Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the effects of ACEI/ARB and beta-blockers on outcomes in SRV patients after accounting for likely cofounders affecting their use. Methods: From a retrospective, multicenter study on heart failure-related outcome in individuals with SRV, those who were taking an ACEI/ARB, beta-blocker, or both of these medication were identified. We performed a propensity analysis to match them to those not using these medications at their initial visit. Matching was based on a propensity score, which captured co-morbidities, demographics, and baseline echocardiographic parameters. Primary outcome of death, transplant, or mechanical circulatory support, and secondary outcomes of heart failure hospitalizations/atrial arrhythmias were analyzed respectively. Results: We identified 393 patients taking ACEI/ARB or beta-blocker, or taking both a beta-blocker and ACEI/ARB (62.1% male, median age 31.3 years) and 484 patients (56.4% male, median age of 26.0 years) who were neither on a beta-blocker nor on ACEI/ARB at the time of initial clinic visit. Median follow-up was ∼8 years. After propensity matching, medication use was not associated with decreased mortality, heart failure hospitalizations, or arrhythmias. Hazard ratios remained positive for beta blockers, implying potential harm rather than benefit. Conclusions: In this large multicenter propensity-matched observational study, patients with SRV taking beta-blockers or ACEI/ARB did not have a benefit in survival or reduced hospitalization. The likelihood of demonstrating favorable effects in larger studies appears remote.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC AdvancesSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207