Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance in Relation to the Incidence of Cardiovascular Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The prospective association between insulin levels and risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the relationship of the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), as well as insulin levels, with risk of nonfatal and fatal CVD over the 8-year follow-up of the San Antonio Heart Study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Between 1984 and 1988, randomly selected Mexican-American and non-Hispanic white residents of San Antonio participated in baseline examinations that included fasting blood samples for glucose, insulin, and lipids, a glucose tolerance test, anthropometric measurements, and a lifestyle questionnaire. Between 1991 and 1996, 2,569 subjects who were free of diabetes at baseline were reexamined using the same protocol. RESULTS: Over the follow-up period, 187 subjects experienced an incident cardiovascular event (heart attack, stroke, heart surgery, angina, or CVD death). Logistic regression analysis indicated that risk of a CVD event increased across quintiles of HOMA-IR after adjustment for age, sex, and ethnicity (P for trend <0.0001; quintile 5 vs. quintile 1, odds ratio [OR] 2.52, 95% CI 1.46-4.36). Additional adjustment for LDL, triglyceride, HDL, systolic blood pressure, smoking, alcohol consumption, exercise, and waist circumference only modestly reduced the magnitude of these associations (P for trend 0.02; quintile 5 vs. quintile 1, OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.05-3.59). Furthermore, there were no significant interactions between HOMA-IR and ethnicity, sex, hypertension, dyslipidemia, glucose tolerance (impaired glucose tolerance versus normal glucose tolerance), or obesity. The magnitude and direction of the relationship between insulin concentration and incident CVD were similar. CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant association between HOMA-IR and risk of CVD after adjustment for multiple covariates. The topic remains controversial, however, and additional studies are required, particularly among women and minority populations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".