MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048772309 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn018

Risk factors for myocardial infarction in women and men: insights from the INTERHEART study

2008· article· en· W2048772309 on OpenAlexafffund
Sonia S. Anand, Shofiqul Islam, Annika Rosengren, Maria Grazia Franzosi, Krisela Steyn, Mátyás Keltai, Rafael Díaz, Sumathy Rangarajan, Salim Yusuf

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research InstituteHamilton Health SciencesHamilton General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWorld Heart FederationEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionDiabetes mellitusInternal medicinePsychosocialRisk factorAbdominal obesityObesityPopulationDemographyGerontologyMetabolic syndromeEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of death among men and women globally. Women develop CHD about 10 years later than men, yet the reasons for this are unclear. The purpose of this report is to determine if differences in risk factor distributions exist between women and men across various age categories to help explain why women develop acute MI later than men. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used the INTERHEART global case-control study including 27 098 participants from 52 countries, 6787 of whom were women. The median age of first acute MI was higher in women than men (65 vs. 56 years; P < 0.0001). Nine modifiable risk factors were associated with MI in women and men. Hypertension [2.95(2.66 -3.28) vs. 2.32(2.16-2.48)], diabetes [4.26(3.68-4.94) vs. 2.67(2.43-2.94), physical activity [0.48(0.41-0.57) vs. 0.77(0.71-0.83)], and moderate alcohol use [0.41(0.34-0.50) vs. 0.88(0.82-0.94)] were more strongly associated with MI among women than men. The association of abnormal lipids, current smoking, abdominal obesity, high risk diet, and psychosocial stress factors with MI was similar in women and men. Risk factors associations were generally stronger among younger individuals compared to older women and men. The population attributable risk (PAR) of all nine risk factors exceeded 94%, and was similar among women and men (96 vs. 93%). Men were significantly more likely to suffer a MI prior to 60 years of age than were women, however, after adjusting for levels of risk factors, the sex difference in the probability of MI cases occurring before the age of 60 years was reduced by more than 80%. CONCLUSION: Women experience their first acute MI on average 9 years later than men. Nine modifiable risk factors are significantly associated with acute MI in both men and women and explain greater than 90% of the PAR. The difference in age of first MI is largely explained by the higher risk factor levels at younger ages in men compared to women.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 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

Citations917
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207