Risk Factor Profiles for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Black and Other Africans with Established Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Black Africans reportedly experience a distinctly low risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). We investigated whether this protection was present among Africans with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We determined disparities in CVD risk factor profiles (major conventional: hypertension, dyslipidemia, smoking, and diabetes; other conventional: underweight, obesity, metabolic syndrome, chronic kidney disease, alcohol consumption, tension, depression, and body height; nonconventional: rheumatoid factor status and markers of inflammation) and arterial stiffness (brachial pulse pressure) between 291 black and 335 other (229 white, 64 Asian, and 42 mixed ancestry) consecutive Africans with RA in multivariable regression models. RESULTS: After adjusting for demographic characteristics and healthcare sector attendance, black Africans had more prevalent hypertension (OR 1.76, p = 0.01) and diabetes (OR 1.90, p = 0.07), smoked less frequently (OR 0.12, p < 0.0001), and had concurrent lower total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations that resulted in unaltered atherogenic indices (p = 0.2) than the other participants in the study. These findings translated into global scores for major conventional risk factor-mediated future CVD event rates that were not reduced in black patients. Proportions of individual metabolic syndrome components differed between black and other patients but their total numbers of metabolic risk factors (p = 0.4) and metabolic syndrome frequencies (OR 1.44, p = 0.1) were similar. Black ethnicity did not independently associate with rheumatoid factor status, markers of inflammation, and brachial pulse pressures. CONCLUSION: The overall conventional and nonconventional atherosclerotic CVD risk burdens and arterial stiffness were not reduced in black patients with RA. CVD risk should be assessed and managed independent of ethnic origin and epidemiological transition stage in RA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".