Sex Differences in Psychosocial Factors and Angina in Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women with chronic coronary disease have more frequent angina and worse health status than men, despite having less coronary artery disease (CAD). We examined whether perceived stress and depressive symptoms mediate sex differences in angina, and whether this relationship differs in the setting of obstructive CAD or ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA). METHODS: We analyzed the association between sex, stress (Perceived Stress Scale-4) and depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-8) on angina-related health status (Seattle Angina Questionnaire [SAQ]) at enrollment in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial and CIAO-ISCHEMIA (Changes in Ischemia and Angina Over 1 Year Among ISCHEMIA Trial Screen Failures With No Obstructive CAD on Coronary CT [Computed Tomography] Angiography) ancillary study. RESULTS: =0.012). Higher stress and depressive symptoms were associated with worse angina in both cohorts. Female sex, Perceived Stress Scale-4 score, and Patient Health Questionnaire-8 score were each independently associated with lower SAQ summary score, but CAD versus INOCA cohort was not. There was no interaction between sex and stress (-0.39 [95% CI, -1.01 to 0.23]) or sex and depression (-0.00 [95% CI, -0.53 to 0.53]) on SAQ summary score. CONCLUSIONS: High stress and depressive symptoms were independently associated with worse angina and poorer health status, without interaction with sex with or without obstructive CAD. Factors other than stress or depression contribute to worse health status in women with obstructive CAD or INOCA. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT02347215, NCT01471522.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".