Examining the Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Psoriasis: A Critical Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in psoriasis patients could be due to a greater prevalence of traditional cardiovascular (CV) risk factors or increased inflammatory disease burden. OBJECTIVE: To critically evaluate evidence on the etiology and magnitude of CV risk in psoriasis patients. METHODS: A total of 497 articles were identified for review through a PubMed search using the terms "CVD and psoriasis"; 43 were selected. Data measuring the risk of comorbidities and CV risk factors in psoriasis were retrieved. RESULTS: Psoriasis patients have an increased prevalence of CV risk factors. Evidence suggests an increased risk of CV morbidity and mortality associated with psoriasis itself. Risk estimates vary across studies (OR range 1.13-6.48), possibly due to heterogeneous study design and incomplete data. CONCLUSION: Although additional data are required, increased awareness of the association of psoriasis with CV risk factors could lead to early diagnosis and treatment of comorbidities, with resultant improvement in morbidity and mortality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".