MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2413243023 · doi:10.1191/1358863x04vm552xx

Vascular viewpoint

2004· article· en· W2413243023 sur OpenAlexaff
Lawrence DeKoning, Sonia S. Anand

Notice bibliographique

RevueVascular Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueNutritional Studies and Diet
Établissements canadiensMcMaster UniversityHamilton General Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineMediterranean dietProspective cohort studyPopulationDiabetes mellitusDemographyEuropean Prospective Investigation into Cancer and NutritionCohortInternal medicineEnvironmental healthEndocrinology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Question: Does adherence to a Mediterranean diet improve total mortality, as well as mortality due to coronary heart disease (CHD) and cancer? Population: Men and women aged 20 86 years from all geographic areas within Greece. Subjects having CHD, cancer, and diabetes mellitus at the time of enrollment were excluded. Design and methods: A cohort of 28 572 participants was recruited as part of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) and 22 043 were followed prospectively for a median duration of 44 months. Baseline measurements of diet were obtained using a validated semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire, and adherence was determined using an aggregate 10-point scale (from zero to nine, indicating greater adherence with increasing score) devised a priori to incorporate nine prominent components of the traditional Mediterranean diet. A binary value was assigned based on the relative consumption of presumed beneficial or detrimental components. Participants whose consumption of beneficial components (vegetables, legumes, fruits and nuts, cereal, fish, ratio of monounsaturated to saturated fats) was above sex-specific medians were assigned a score of one. Participants whose consumption was below-median were assigned a score of zero. Detrimental components (meat and poultry, dairy) were scored in the opposite fashion -participants whose consumption was above-median were assigned a score of zero, and participants whose consumption was below-median were assigned a score of one. Scoring of alcohol intake was based on whether consumption was within beneficial sex-specific consumption ranges (males, 10 50 g per day; females, 5 25 g per day). Cause of death was obtained from death certificates and official records, and was classified by physicians blinded to diet score. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to measure the association between studied food groups, adherence to the Mediterranean diet and mortality after adjustment for age, sex, energy expenditure, smoking status, anthropomorphic measures, and other confounding factors. Results: Over the follow-up period, 81 139 person-years were accrued and 275 deaths were recorded. Adherence to the Mediterranean diet was inversely related to mortality. A two-point increase in the aggregate score resulted in an adjusted hazard ratio for death of 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.87). Mortality due to CHD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.47 to 0.94]) and mortality due to cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.98]) were also inversely associated with a two-point increase in the aggregate score. Consumption of individual food components in the Mediterranean diet was generally not associated with total mortality. Consumption of fruit and nuts (adjusted hazard ratio 0.82 [95% CI, 0.70 to 0.96]) and the ratio of monounsaturated fats to saturated fats (adjusted hazard ratio 0.86 [95% CI, 0.76 to 0.98]), however, were associated with reduced mortality. Conclusion: Adherence to the Mediterranean diet is associated with a significant reduction in total mortality, CHD, and cancer mortality. Individual components of the diet are not generally predictive of total mortality, suggesting that multiple dietary components are necessary to yield the most protective effect.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,326
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,961

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0050,003
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,3260,194

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,018
Tête enseignante GPT0,268
Écart entre enseignants0,250 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations73
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVascular MedicineMême sujetNutritional Studies and DietTravaux en français237 207