MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414452960 · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2025.09.031

Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Constrictive Pericarditis in a Statewide Australian Cohort of Patients With Pericardial Disease

2025· article· en· W4414452960 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Timothy N. Kwan, Gemma Kwan, David Brieger, Vincent Chow, Leonard Kritharides, A. Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPericarditis and Cardiac Tamponade
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre for Health Record Linkage
KeywordsConstrictive pericarditisCohortEpidemiologyPericarditisConstrictionHeart diseaseCohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Constrictive pericarditis is a rare but serious complication of pericardial disease, with limited longitudinal studies assessing its risk factors. In this study we evaluated the epidemiology and predictors of constrictive pericarditis in a large population-based cohort. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all hospitalized patients with pericardial disease from 2004 to 2021 using the Australian New South Wales Admitted Patient Data Collection database. Multivariable logistic regression identified risk factors for constrictive pericarditis at index admission with pericardial disease, whereas time-dependent Cox regression and the Fine-Gray method were used to assess risk factors during follow-up. RESULTS: Among 45,445 patients with pericardial disease, 763 (1.7%) developed constrictive pericarditis (median age 64.3 years; 63.4% men). The median time from cardiac surgery to diagnosis of constriction was 6 months and from autoimmune disease diagnosis it was 2 years. Of these patients, 530 (1.2%) had constriction at index presentation of pericardial disease and 233 (0.5%) developed constriction during follow-up. Constriction at index presentation was associated with older age, malignancy (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.8), tuberculosis (OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.4-8.9), liver disease (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.2), and heart failure (OR 2.7 95% CI 2.2-3.3). Constriction identified during follow-up was more common after hospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 5.3, 95% CI 3.4-8.2), nonconstrictive recurrent pericardial disease requiring hospitalization (HR 3.7, 95% CI 2.3-6.2), or pericardiocentesis (HR 3.6, 95% CI 2.7-4.8). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, contemporary cohort, constrictive pericarditis was rare but occurred more commonly after a diagnosis of tuberculosis, malignancy, liver disease, heart failure, recurrent pericardial disease, and pericardiocentesis. These findings highlight the importance of long-term vigilance when considering constriction in at-risk populations.

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)0.002
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CardiologySame topicPericarditis and Cardiac TamponadeFrench-language works237,207