Cardiovascular risk among South Asians living in Canada: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: South Asians represent about 3% of the Canadian population and have a higher burden of certain cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with white people. The objective of this study was to review the literature to compare cardiovascular risk factors and disease management practices among adult South Asian and white Canadians. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases from their inception through Feb. 17, 2014 and the reference lists of the selected articles. English-language studies of interventions and observational studies of biological mechanisms underlying CVD risk in South Asians conducted in Canada were eligible for inclusion. Where appropriate, we used random-effects meta-analyses to integrate results comparing the CVD risk profiles of South Asian and white Canadians. RESULTS: We included 50 articles (n = 5 805 313 individuals) in this review. Compared with white Canadians, South Asian Canadians had a higher prevalence and incidence of CVD, an increased prevalence of diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 2.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81 to 2.80, p < 0.001) and hypertension (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.22, p = 0.02), lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (mean difference -0.19 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.13 mmol/L, p < 0.001) and a higher percentage of body fat (men: absolute mean difference 3.23%, 95% CI 0.83% to 5.62%, p = 0.008; women: absolute mean difference 4.09%, 95% CI 3.46% to 4.72%, p < 0.001). South Asian people are also more sedentary, consume higher levels of carbohydrates and are less likely to smoke tobacco (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.60, p < 0.001]) than white Canadians. No differences in access to diagnostic tests, outcomes following cardiovascular surgery or use of cardiac rehabilitation programs were apparent. INTERPRETATION: Compared with white people, South Asian people living in Canada have a higher prevalence and incidence of CVD and possess a unique cardiovascular risk profile.
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 | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".