MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Venous Thromboembolism

2007· review· en· W2006666326 on OpenAlexaff
Walter Ageno, Cecilia Becattini, Timothy Brighton, Rita Selby, Pieter W. Kamphuisen

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineOdds ratioDiabetes mellitusConfidence intervalCohort studyMeta-analysisAsymptomaticEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The concept that venous thromboembolism (VTE) and atherosclerosis are 2 completely distinct entities has recently been challenged because patients with VTE have more asymptomatic atherosclerosis and more cardiovascular events than control subjects. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the association between cardiovascular risk factors and VTE. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medline and EMBASE databases were searched to identify studies that evaluated the prevalence of major cardiovascular risk factors in VTE patients and control subjects. Studies were selected using a priori defined criteria, and each study was reviewed by 2 authors who abstracted data on study characteristics, study quality, and outcomes. Odds ratios or weighted means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were then calculated and pooled using a random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated through the use of chi2 and I2 statistics. Twenty-one case-control and cohort studies with a total of 63 552 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with control subjects, the risk of VTE was 2.33 for obesity (95% CI, 1.68 to 3.24), 1.51 for hypertension (95% CI, 1.23 to 1.85), 1.42 for diabetes mellitus (95% CI, 1.12 to 1.77), 1.18 for smoking (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.46), and 1.16 for hypercholesterolemia (95% CI, 0.67 to 2.02). Weighted mean high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were significantly lower in VTE patients, whereas no difference was observed for total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Significant heterogeneity among studies was present in all subgroups except for the diabetes mellitus subgroup. Higher-quality studies were more homogeneous, and significant associations remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular risk factors are associated with VTE. This association is clinically relevant with respect to individual screening, risk factor modification, and primary and secondary prevention of VTE. Prospective studies should further investigate the underlying mechanisms of this relationship.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations962
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207