MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W78489026

Comparing the psychological stress between non-smoking patients and smoking patients who experience abrupt smoking cessation during hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction: a pilot study.

2009· article· en· W78489026 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn Pfaff, Maher M. El‐Masri, Susan M. Fox-Wasylyshyn

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStressorSmoking cessationMyocardial infarctionDepression (economics)AnxietyMoodInternal medicineAngerNicotineInsomniaPhysical therapyPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Stress is an untoward condition in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Abrupt nicotine withdrawal is associated with increased symptoms of stress. However, little is known about the impact of smoking cessation on the psychological indicators of stress among hospitalized AMI patients. PURPOSE: In this pilot study we compared the psychological stressors between non-smoking AMI patients and smoking patients who abruptly ceased smoking following admission to the CCU. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was piloted on a sample of 57 AMI patients (29 smokers and 28 nonsmokers) on the second day of admission to the CCU. Psychological stress was measured using the Profile of Mood States and the Insomnia Severity Index. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) suggested that after adjusting for age, smokers experienced significantly higher overall levels of stress than non-smokers (F = 3.13; p = 0.016). Post-hoc analyses suggested that scores of depression (p = 0.033), anxiety (p = 0.007), and anger (p = 0.017) were particularly higher among smokers, as compared to non-smokers. However, the two groups were not different with regard to their scores on fatigue (p = 0.528) and insomnia (p = 0.299). CONCLUSIONS: Abrupt smoking cessation may expose patients admitted with AMI symptoms to higher levels of psychological stress. Given the potential damaging impact of psychological stressors on the physical outcomes of these patients, these findings demonstrate the need for continued assessment and research related to the management of nicotine withdrawal following AMI.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→