Ethnicity and the Determinants of Cardiovascular Disease among South Asians, Chinese and European Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant differences in the cardiovascular mortality rate exist between Canadians of South Asian, Chinese and European origin. This thesis represents a six year effort to detennine the prevalence of cardiovascular disease, the burden of atherosclerosis, and the prevalence of their major determinants among three ethnic groups in Canada. In addition to the study of the relationship of the "classical" cardiovascular risk factors to disease outcomes, the contribution to disease outcomes of selected "emerging" risk factors (e.g. markers of thrombosis, socio-economic, dietary, and psychosocial stress factors) was studied. The major findings reported in this thesis include the confirmation that South Asians in Canada have the greatest prevalence, Europeans have an intermediate prevalence, and the Chinese have the lowest prevalence of cardiovascular disease. However, Europeans have significantly more atherosclerosis compared to the South Asians and Chinese. Yet, for any given amount of atherosclerosis, South Asians suffer more cardiovascular events. This may reflect an increased propensity of South Asians to develop arterial thrombosis. Major differences in the daily calorie consumption, and in the sources of calories exist between the ethnic groups. Diet was measured using food frequency questionnaires developed for each ethnic group, which were found to reliably classify individuals into high or low consumers for a given macronutrient. This classification facilitates the study of diet-disease relationships. Psychosocial stress was measured in a valid and reliable way using a single questionnaire created for use by all participants. Discrimination in the workplace is a challenge to measure, and while it was reported more often among South Asians and Chinese, its reproducibility was relatively low. Markers of social stability (e.g. income and employment) were associated with psychosocial stress factors, neurohormones, atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. This demonstrates the powerful influence that "social factors" have on the health of free-living Canadians.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".