MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407086078 · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2024.10.121

Secondary Prevention Medications in 17 Countries Grouped by Income Level (PURE)

2025· article· en· W4407086078 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of OntarioOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareAstraZeneca Canada
KeywordsMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether global use of medications for secondary cardiovascular (CVD) prevention is improving over time. OBJECTIVES: This study across 17 high-, middle- and low-income countries described variations in secondary CVD prevention medication use over a median follow-up of 12 years. METHODS: In the multinational PURE (Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology) cohort study, we conducted a repeated cross-sectional analysis to examine temporal variations in the use of secondary prevention medications in participants with CVD. In participants with coronary artery disease, we focused on antiplatelet agents, statins, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, and β-blockers. In participants with stroke, we focused on antiplatelet agents, statins, RAS inhibitors, and other blood pressure-lowering drugs. Medications were collected at baseline and on 4 subsequent follow-up visits. RESULTS: The analysis included 7,409 participants with a diagnosis of CVD at the baseline visit, 8,792 at the second visit, 9,236 at the third visit, 11,082 at the fourth visit, and 11,677 at the last visit. The median age at baseline was 58.0 years, and 52.9% of the participants were female. The median follow-up was 12 years, with the median year of the baseline visit in 2007 and the fifth visit in 2019. Over this period, use of 1 or more classes of medications for secondary CVD prevention was 41.3% (95% CI: 40.2%-42.4%) at baseline, peaked at 43.1% (95% CI: 42.0%-44.1%), and then decreased to 31.3% (95% CI: 30.4%-32.1%) by the last study visit. In high-income countries, this use decreased from 88.8% (95% CI: 86.6%-91.0%) to 77.3% (95% CI: 74.9%-79.6%). In upper-middle-income countries, this use increased from 55.0% (95% CI: 52.8%-57.3%) to 61.1% (95% CI: 59.1%-63.1%). In lower-middle-income countries, use of at least 1 class of medications was 29.5% (95% CI: 28.1%-30.9%) at baseline, peaked at 31.7% (95% CI: 30.4%-33.1%), and then decreased to 13.4% (95% CI: 12.5%-14.2%) by the last visit. In low-income countries, use of at least 1 class of medications was 20.8% (95% CI: 18.1%-23.5%) at baseline, peaked at 47.3% (95% CI: 44.8%-49.9%), and then decreased to 27.5% (95% CI: 25.2%-29.9%) by the last study visit. CONCLUSIONS: Globally and in most country income-level groups, the use of medications for secondary CVD prevention has been low, with little improvement over time.

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.

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)0.003
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 score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.305 · 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