MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W81450379

The management of patients who have suffered an acute myocardial infarction in a tertiary care centre.

2001· article· en· W81450379 on OpenAlexaffabout
Haissam Haddad, Greg Searles, Anne M. Gillis

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionCalcium channel blockerBeta blockerDemographicsACE inhibitorEmergency medicineMedical prescriptionTertiary careInternal medicineAngiotensin-converting enzymeHeart failureCalcium
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The standard of management after acute myocardial infarction (MI) includes beta-blockers and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and lipid-lowering agents are indicated for some patients, and calcium channel blockers should generally be avoided. It is suspected that many patients with MI are not discharged from hospital with optimal medical management. OBJECTIVES: To determine what proportion of patients in a tertiary care hospital with acute MI are discharged on optimal medical therapy, and to identify what barriers exist to obtaining optimal treatment for as many patients as possible. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Charts were retrospectively reviewed for 717 patients with acute MI admitted to the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia from January 1, 1997 to April 30, 1999. Charts were reviewed for demographics, comorbidities, investigations performed, and medications on admission and discharge. When discharge medications did not match the optimal medical management, the chart was reviewed for the reasoning behind the decisions. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 9.6%. Among 648 patients who survived to discharge, 577 (89.0%) were discharged on a beta-blocker, 261 (40.3%) on an ACE inhibitor, 105 (16.2%) on a calcium channel blocker and 578 (89.2%) on ASA. Patients 65 years of age or older were less likely than their younger counterparts to be discharged on a beta-blocker (272 of 315 [86.3%] versus 305 of 333 [91.6%], P<0.04) and more likely to be discharged on a calcium channel blocker (70 of 315 [22.2%] versus 35 of 333 [10.5%], P<0.0001). No significant difference in the use of beta-blockers or calcium channel blockers was found between men and women (beta-blockers: 385 of 432 [89.1%] men versus 192 of 216 [89.9%] women, P<0.92); calcium channel blockers (67 of 432 men [15.5%] versus 38 of 216 women [17.6%], P<0.50). Among patients with low density lipoprotein greater than 3.5 mmol/L, 158 of 200 (79.0%) were discharged on a lipid-lowering agent. Among patients with documented ejection fraction less than 40%, 94 of 103 (91.3%) were discharged on an ACE inhibitor. Most patients had acceptable contraindications to the medications that they did not receive. CONCLUSIONS: The study centre showed much better use of appropriate medications than has been previously described, showing that optimal medical therapy can be achieved for the vast majority of patients with acute MI.

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)0.000
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research→French-language works237,207→