The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predictors of 30-Day Mortality in the Era of Reperfusion for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results From an International Trial of 41 021 Patients
Open accessAbstract
Background Despite remarkable advances in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction, substantial early patient mortality remains. Appropriate choices among alternative therapies and the use of clinical resources depend on an estimate of the patient’s risk. Individual patients reflect a combination of clinical features that influence prognosis, and these factors must be appropriately weighted to produce an accurate assessment of risk. Prior studies to define prognosis either were performed before widespread use of thrombolysis or were limited in sample size or spectrum of data. Using the large population of the GUSTO-I trial, we performed a comprehensive analysis of relations between baseline clinical data and 30-day mortality and developed a multivariable statistical model for risk assessment in candidates for thrombolytic therapy. Methods and Results For the 41 021 patients enrolled in GUSTO-I, a randomized trial of four thrombolytic strategies, relations between clinical descriptors routinely collected at initial presentation, and death within 30 days (which occurred in 7% of the population) were examined with both univariable and multivariable analyses. Variables studied included demographics, history and risk factors, presenting characteristics, and treatment assignment. Risk modeling was performed with logistic multiple regression and validated with bootstrapping techniques. Multivariable analysis identified age as the most significant factor influencing 30-day mortality, with rates of 1.1% in the youngest decile (<45 years) and 20.5% in patients >75 (adjusted χ 2 =717, P <.0001). Other factors most significantly associated with increased mortality were lower systolic blood pressure (χ 2 =550, P <.0001), higher Killip class (χ 2 =350, P <.0001), elevated heart rate (χ 2 =275, P <.0001), and anterior infarction (χ 2 =143, P <.0001). Together, these five characteristics contained 90% of the prognostic information in the baseline clinical data. Other significant though less important factors included previous myocardial infarction, height, time to treatment, diabetes, weight, smoking status, type of thrombolytic, previous bypass surgery, hypertension, and prior cerebrovascular disease. Combining prognostic variables through logistic regression, we produced a validated model that stratified patient risk and accurately estimated the likelihood of death. Conclusions The clinical determinants of mortality in patients treated with thrombolytic therapy within 6 hours of symptom onset are multifactorial and the relations complex. Although a few variables contain most of the prognostic information, many others contribute additional independent prognostic information. Through consideration of multiple characteristics, including age, medical history, physiological significance of the infarction, and medical treatment, the prognosis of an individual patient can be accurately estimated.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation
Efron, B., & Gong, G. (1983) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1983.10483087 · Cited by 3,229
Cited by
Internal validation of predictive models
Steyerberg, E. W., Harrell, F. E., Borsboom, G. J. J. M., Eijkemans, M. J. C., Vergouwe, Y., & Habbema, J. D. F. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00341-9 · Cited by 2,746
Towards better clinical prediction models: seven steps for development and an ABCD for validation
Steyerberg, E. W., & Vergouwe, Y. (2014) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu207 · Cited by 1,928
Resting Heart Rate in Cardiovascular Disease
Fox, K., Borer, J. S., Camm, A. J., Danchin, N., Ferrari, R., Lopez Sendon, J. L., Steg, P. G., Tardif, J.-C., Tavazzi, L., & Tendera, M. (2007) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.04.079 · Cited by 1,062
Impact of Diabetes on Mortality After the First Myocardial Infarction
Miettinen, H., Lehto, S., Salomaa, V., Mähönen, M., Niemelä, M., Haffner, S. M., Pyörälä, K., Tuomilehto, J., & The FINMONICA Myocardial Infarction Register Study Group (1998) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.21.1.69 · Cited by 665
Bootstrap Methods for Developing Predictive Models
Austin, P. C., & Tu, J. V. (2004) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1198/0003130043277 · Cited by 622
JCS 2018 Guideline on Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome
Kimura, K., Kimura, T., Ishihara, M., Nakagawa, Y., Nakao, K., Miyauchi, K., Sakamoto, T., Tsujita, K., Hagiwara, N., Miyazaki, S., et al. (2019) · Circulation Journal · doi:10.1253/circj.cj-19-0133 · Cited by 565
Steyerberg, E. W., Borsboom, G. J. J. M., van Houwelingen, H. C., Eijkemans, M. J. C., & Habbema, J. D. F. (2004) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1844 · Cited by 552
Mahaffey, K. W., Wojdyla, D. M., Carroll, K., Becker, R. C., Storey, R. F., Angiolillo, D. J., Held, C., Cannon, C. P., James, S., Pieper, K. S., et al. (2011) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.111.047498 · Cited by 434
Buxton, A. E., Lee, K. L., Hafley, G. E., Pires, L. A., Fisher, J. D., Gold, M. R., Josephson, M. E., Lehmann, M. H., & Prystowsky, E. N. (2007) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.04.095 · Cited by 356
Self-citationMa, H., Wang, J., Thomas, D. P., Tong, C., Leng, L., Wang, W., Merk, M., Zierow, S., Bernhagen, J., Ren, J., et al. (2010) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.110.953208 · Cited by 164
Can one assess whether missing data are missing at random in medical studies?
Potthoff, R. F., Tudor, G. E., Pieper, K. S., & Hasselblad, V. (2006) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1191/0962280206sm448oa · Cited by 141
Application of Shrinkage Techniques in Logistic Regression Analysis: A Case Study
Steyerberg, E. W., Eijkemans, M. J. C., & Habbema, J. D. F. (2001) · Statistica Neerlandica · doi:10.1111/1467-9574.00157 · Cited by 124
Goyal, A., Mehta, S. R., Gerstein, H. C., Díaz, R., Afzal, R., Xavier, D., Zhu, J., Pais, P., Lisheng, L., Kazmi, K. A., et al. (2009) · American Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2008.12.007 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Lee, K. L., Woodlief, L. H., Topol, E. J., Weaver, W. D., Betriu, A., Col, J., Simoons, M., Aylward, P., Van de Werf, F., & Califf, R. M.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 1995-03-15
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1659-1668
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W3021438309
- Cited by
- 1,093
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 39.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.