Alcohol Consumption and Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Benefit of Alcohol Consumed With Meals?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The apparent favorable effect of alcohol on the risk of acute myocardial infarction (MI) may be related to its hypoinsulinemic effect when consumed with meals. We studied how the timing of alcohol consumption in relation to meals might affect the risk of MI in a population with relatively high regular alcohol consumption. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study between 1995 and 1999 in Milan, Italy. Cases were 507 subjects with a first episode of nonfatal acute MI, and controls were 478 patients admitted to hospitals for other acute diseases. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by multiple logistic regression models. RESULTS: Compared with nondrinkers, an inverse trend in risk was observed when alcohol was consumed during meals only (for > or =3 drinks per day: OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.30-0.82). In contrast, no consistent trend in risk was found for subjects drinking outside of meals (for > or =3 drinks per day: 0.98; 0.49-1.96). The pattern of risk was similar when we considered people who drank only wine. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol drinking during meals was inversely related with risk of acute MI, whereas alcohol drinking outside meals only was unrelated to risk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".