OA07.02. Naturopathic medicine for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a pragmatic randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-site pragmatic randomized controlled trial of enhanced usual care (EUC; usual care plus biometric screening) versus EUC plus naturopathic care (EUC+NC). NC consisted of individualized care provided in work-site clinics by licensed naturopathic doctors (NDs) utilizing one or more of the following strategies: lifestyle counseling, nutritional medicine, and/or dietary supplementation. EUC consisted of usual care provided by the participant's family physician in the community following identification as having a higher relative risk of developing cardiovascular disease. Primary outcomes were incidence of metabolic syndrome and 10-year risk of having a cardiovascular event based on the Framingham algorithm and the Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III diagnostic criteria for metabolic syndrome. A total of 246 participants were randomized and enrolled in study work-sites in three cities across Canada; 207 participants completed the study. The two groups were similar at baseline. After one year of individualized naturopathic care, there was a 3.6 percentage point reduction in 10-year cardiovascular risk (95% CI: -5.1, -2.3) and a 27.4% reduced prevalence of metabolic syndrome (95% CI; -41.7, -13.1) in the treatment arm (n=124) compared to the control arm (n=122). This study is the first pragmatic whole-practice trial to formally evaluate the benefits of individualized naturopathic care for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. In this setting, and widely generalizable due to the whole-systems methodology employed, naturopathic medicine appears to provide safe and effective risk reduction for people at risk of developing cardiovascular disease.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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".