Sleep duration, snoring habits and risk of acute myocardial infarction in China population: results of the INTERHEART study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Less sleep time and snoring have been associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in Western populations; however, few studies have evaluated the different aspects of sleep duration and snoring frequency in relation to CVD, and this association has not been examined in China. The present study aimed to address the relation between sleep duration, snoring frequency and risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in China population. METHODS: We conducted a hospital-based case-control study. Cases were first AMI (n = 2909). Controls were matched to cases on age and sex. 2947 controls who did not report previous angina or physical disability completed a questionnaire on sleep duration and snoring frequency. We used logistic regression to control for other risk factors. RESULTS: We observed an inverse association between serious snoring frequency and AMI risk. After adjustment for all the risk factors, and the OR for everyday group and 3-5 times per week group was 1.45 (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.91) and 1.93 (95% CI: 1.52-2.46) compared to no snoring group. The OR for serious level group and moderate group was 1.77 (95% CI: 1.29 to 2.43) and 1.37 (95% CI: 1.10 to 1.69) compared to no snoring group. People having serious snoring increased 77% risk of AMI. 15.2% people in control group have ≤ 6 hours sleeping, compared with 17.4% in AMI group. CONCLUSIONS: Snoring frequency, including as much as everyday and 3-5 times per week, was positively associated with AMI risk and less sleep duration was associated with risk of AMI. Less sleep time could increase AMI risk in China population.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".