MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097963959

RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access

2013· article· en· W7097963959 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupCensusIncidence (geometry)Myocardial infarctionStandardized rateEpidemiologyMortality rate
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: As populations in Western countries continue to change in their ethnic composition, there is a need for regular surveillance of diseases that have previously shown some health disparities. Earlier data have already demonstrated high rates of cardiovascular mortality among South Asians and relatively lower rates among people of Chinese descent. The aim of this study was to describe the differences in the incidence of hospitalized acute myocardial infarction (AMI) among the three largest ethnic groups in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Methods: Using hospital administrative data, we identified all patients with incident AMI in BC between April 1, 1995, and March 31, 2002. Census data from 2001 provided the denominator for the entire BC population. Ethnicity was determined using validated surname analysis and applied to the census and hospital administrative datasets. Direct age standardization was used to compare incidence rates. Results: A total of 34,848 AMI cases were identified. Among men, South Asians had the highest age standardized rate of AMI hospitalization at 4.97/1000 population/year, followed by Whites at 3.29, and then Chinese at 0.98. Young South Asian men, in particular, showed incidence rates that were double that of young Whites and ten times that of young Chinese men. South Asian women also had the highest age-standardized rate of AMI hospitalization at 2.35/1000 population/year, followed by White women (1.53) and Chinese women (0.49).

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
gptInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7400.606

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 head0.300
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research→CategoryInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)→French-language works237,207→