MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012852820 · doi:10.1515/cclm.2006.048

Association of angiotensin II type 1 receptor gene polymorphism with carotid atherosclerosis

2006· article· en· W2012852820 on OpenAlexaff
Qing-He Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenin-Angiotensin System Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal University Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymorphism (computer science)GeneMedicineInternal medicineReceptorAngiotensin IIGene polymorphismGeneticsBiologyEndocrinologyGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Polymorphisms of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AGTR1) gene are associated with essential hypertension and cardiovascular disease, but the correlation between AGTR1 A1166C polymorphism and carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) remains unclear. We sought to demonstrate correlation between AGTR1 gene polymorphism and carotid atherosclerosis in a Chinese population. METHOD: A total of 150 patients diagnosed with essential hypertension were included in this study. The AGTR1 A1166C polymorphism was detected by restriction analysis of the polymerase chain reaction product with Ddel digestion. Carotid IMT was measured by B-mode ultrasonography. RESULTS: The AC genotype frequency and the C1166 allele frequency of the AGTR1 gene in essential hypertensive patients were significantly higher than in controls (22.00% vs. 6.00% for AC, p < 0.01; 18.67% vs. 8.00% for the C allele, p < 0.05). Hypertensive subjects with the AC genotype had increased carotid artery IMT and IMT/D (common carotid artery diameter) ratio compared with the AA genotype (IMT 1.14 +/- 0.39 vs. 0.88 +/- 0.16, p < 0.05; IMT/D 14.08 +/- 2.88 vs. 10.51 +/- 1.94, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the AGTR1 A1166C polymorphism is associated with essential hypertension and carotid atherosclerosis in a Chinese 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)Same topicRenin-Angiotensin System StudiesFrench-language works237,207