{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018651362984218076, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.987124463519313, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Reading of articles concerning treatment of acute phase of myocardial infarction].

The number of articles concerning the treatment of acute myocardial infarction is large, and systematic analysis can improve the comprehension of their results. The object of this paper is to propose a method of classifying these articles with respect to their qualities and defects in order to orient workers towards the use of the most satisfactory articles for bibliographic purposes. The questions that have to be addressed are: what is the object of the study; is the instrument of measurement adapted to the objective of the study; which patients were studied; was the study performed with a double-blind protocol; what was the number of cases and does this number allow a valid response to the question; what was the plan of the study; what were the judgement criteria and what significance can be accorded to these criteria, and finally, what was the type of analysis, were there analyses of sub-groups, and if so, are the analyses pertinent. Based on examples in the literature, the authors justify why these questions should be asked and how the responses to these questions influence the judgement of a given article. In conclusion, the quality of therapeutic trials in acute myocardial infarction is very variable: systematic analysis allows them to be classified in a subjective scale of quality.