Abstract 02: American Heart Association (AHA)’s Life’s Simple 7 and Risk of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD): The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Approximately 8.5 million Americans are affected by lower extremity PAD, which is associated with a substantially greater risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, mortality and functional decline. In 2010, the AHA initiated new CV health metrics (Life’s Simple 7) to monitor the goal of significantly improving CV health by the year 2020. The extent to which Life’s Simple 7 may be associated with risk of PAD or change in the ankle brachial index (ABI), the major clinical diagnostic criterion for PAD, has not been established. Methods: MESA is a population-based prospective cohort of 6814 Caucasian, African-American, Hispanic and Chinese men and women from six US field centers. The baseline exam occurred in 2000-02. Life’s Simple 7 at baseline included AHA definitions of poor, intermediate and ideal health behaviors (diet, body mass index, smoking, physical activity) and health factors (blood pressure, glucose, cholesterol), and was modeled continuously on a 0-14 point scale, with a higher score indicating better CV health. The scale was also categorized into overall inadequate (0-7points), average (8-11) and optimum (12-14) CV health. Incident PAD was defined as an ABI≤0.90 at Exam 3 (2004-05) or Exam 5 (2010-12), removing participants both with ABI>1.40 and prevalent PAD at baseline. Cox models were used for incident PAD analyses and change in the ABI over time was assessed using mixed models. All models were adjusted for age, sex and race/ethnicity. Results: The mean±SD Life’s Simple 7 score was 8.4±2.1, with 33.8% of participants classified as inadequate, 59.6% average, and 6.6% classified as having optimum CV health. Adjusted rates of PAD per 1000 person-years were 7.3 for inadequate, 3.2 for average and 1.1 for optimum CV health. Each point higher on the Life’s Simple 7 scale was associated with a 20% lower risk of incident PAD (95% CI (0.76-0.85); p<0.001). Compared to inadequate CV health, participants with average and optimum health had a 55% lower risk (95% CI (0.37-0.56), p<0.001) and an 85% lower risk (95% CI (0.06-0.38); p<0.001) of incident PAD, respectively. Each point higher on the scale was associated with a higher average ABI over a median follow-up time of 9.4 years (0.006 (95% CI (0.005, 0.007), p<0.001). Compared to those with inadequate health, participants with average and optimum health maintained a 0.021 (95% CI (0.016, 0.027, p<0.001) and a 0.030 (95% CI (0.018, 0.041, p<0.001) greater average ABI over the follow-up period, respectively. Conclusions: Maintaining average or optimum CV health results in a substantially reduced risk of incident PAD and also in maintaining a higher average ABI over time, even when accounting for age, sex and race/ethnicity. Encouraging improvement in health behaviors, and treatment to achieve and maintain better levels of CV health metrics, may contribute to decreasing the rate of PAD.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».