MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025484520 · doi:10.1002/bjs.9567

Cardiovascular risk in patients with small and medium abdominal aortic aneurysms, and no history of cardiovascular disease

2014· article· en· W2025484520 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S Sohrabi, Stephen B. Wheatcroft, Julian H. Barth, Marc A. Bailey, Toby Johnson, Katherine Bridge, Kathryn J Griffin, Paul D. Baxter, Daniel Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic aneurysm repair treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleBritish Heart FoundationW. Garfield Weston FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchGarfield Weston Foundation
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineAbdominal aortic aneurysmProspective cohort studyCohortConfidence intervalGastroenterologyDiseaseCohort studySurgeryCardiologyAneurysm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the main cause of death in people with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). There is little evidence that screening for AAA reduces all-cause or cardiovascular mortality. The aim of the study was to assess whether subjects with a small or medium AAA (3·0-5·4 cm), without previous history of clinical CVD, had raised levels of CVD biomarkers or increased total mortality. METHODS: This prospective study included subjects with a small or medium AAA and controls, all without a history of clinical CVD. CVD biomarkers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, hs-CRP; heart-type fatty acid-binding protein, H-FABP) were measured, and survival was recorded. RESULTS: Of a total of 815 people, 476 with an AAA and 339 controls, a cohort of 86 with small or medium AAA (3-5·4 cm) and 158 controls, all with no clinical history of CVD, were identified. The groups were matched for age and sex. The AAA group had higher median (i.q.r.) levels of hs-CRP (2·8 (1·2-6·0) versus 1·3 (0·5-3·5) mg/l; P < 0·001) and H-FABP (4·6 (3·5-6·0) versus 4·0 (3·3-5·1) µg/l; P = 0·011) than controls. Smoking was more common in the AAA group; however, hs-CRP and H-FABP levels were not related to smoking. Mean survival was lower in the AAA group: 6·3 (95 per cent confidence interval (c·i.) 5·6 to 6·9) years versus 8·0 (7·6 to 8·1) years in controls (P < 0·001). Adjusted mortality was higher in the AAA group (hazard ratio 3·41, 95 per cent c·i. 2·11 to 9·19; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: People with small or medium AAA and no clinical symptoms of CVD have higher levels of hs-CRP and H-FABP, and higher mortality compared with controls. They should continue to receive secondary prevention against CVD.

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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of surgerySame topicAortic aneurysm repair treatmentsFrench-language works237,207