The carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in Quebec : a study of the last three years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. The Carotid Endarterectomy (CEA) is used for stroke prophylaxis in asymptomatic carotid stenosis and in patients with previous strokes or transient ischemic attacks. Objective. To audit the operative results of the CEA in the province of Quebec between 1996 and 1999. Methods. The Quebec Medical Discharge Summary Database provided demographics and surgical complications following all CEAs performed between 1996--1999. Results. The CEA was performed at a rate of 42 procedures/100 000 persons aged greater than 40 however this rate appears to be declining over the study span. Being operated on by a neurosurgeon was an independent risk factor for peri-operative stroke (OR 1.55, 95%CI 1.12--2.12). There was no difference in outcomes between teaching and non-teaching centres. Conclusion. The CEA is being used less frequently recently and is being performed fewer times than in the United States. Neurosurgeons have poorer outcomes which might be due to surgeon factors or poorly controlled counfounders.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".