Relationship between Physical Activity, Cardiovascular Disease, and Differential Clusters of the Metabolic Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a cluster of atherogenic risk factors that predispose to cardiovascular disease (CVD) and premature mortality. However, since MetS can be classified by 16 different combinations of components, these clusters represent potentially different MetS phenotypes. PURPOSE: To characterize the prevalence of different MetS clusters and their relationship with existing CVD (self-reported heart attack, stroke or other heart disease). METHODS: Data from the Canadian Heart Health Surveys (20 to 74 y; N=9 144) was used. MetS was classified according to a modified NCEP Adult Treatment Panel III approach, operationally identified by the presence of three or more of: low HDL (M: <1.04 mM; F: <1.29 mM), high TG (≥1.69 mM), high waist circumference (M: >102 cm; F: >88 cm), high BP (≥130/85 mmHg), and self-reported diabetes. Leisure-time PA was dichotomized as 'active' (exercise once per week for at least 31+ minutes, at least some of which is strenuous) or 'inactive'. Occupational PA was considered as any strenuous PA at work. All analyses were weighted to be representative of the Canadian population. RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of MetS was 19% (M: 21%; F: 18%). The most prevalent combination of MetS components were clusters including high TG, high BP, and high waist circumference (cluster 1), followed by clustering of TG, low HDL and high BP (cluster 2). Logistic regressions adjusted for age and sex revealed that the association between any 3 or more components of the MetS and CVD (OR=1.5, 95% CI:1.3-1.7) was similar to those of the most common MetS phenotypes (cluster 1: OR=1.3, 1.1-1.6; cluster 2: OR=1.4, 1.2-1.7). These associations were only modestly influenced by either leisure-time PA or occupational PA. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that despite differences in risk factor clustering, the relationship between MetS components and prevalent CVD remains elevated in individuals with moderate leisure or occupational PA. Further research is necessary to determine the clinical relevance of these potential differences in prospective analyses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".