Prevalence and concordance of high cardiovascular disease scores in HIV/AIDS patients from Croatia and Serbia with four international algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We evaluated cardiovascular risks in HIV-infected patients from Croatia and Serbia and the eligibility for statin therapy as recommended by the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS) Guidelines and European Society of Cardiology and the European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention [1-3]. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of consecutive patients between 40 and 79 years old who had received antiretroviral therapy for at least 12 months was performed. RESULTS: Of 254 (132 from Croatia and 122 from Serbia) persons included in the study, 76% were male; median age was 49 years. Up to 51.6% of persons had a high CVD risk. The prevalence of current smoking was 42.9%, hypertension 31.5% and hypercholesterolaemia (>6.2 mmol/L) 35.4%. Statins would be recommended to 21.3% (95% CI, 16.3% to 27.4%) of persons by the EACS, 25.6% (95% CI, 20.2% to 31.9%) by ESC/EAS and 37.9% (95% CI, 31.6 to 44.6%) by the ACC/AHA guidelines. A high 5-year data collection on adverse effects of anti-HIV drugs study risk score (>5%) had a moderate agreement with the high (≥20%) 10-year CVD Framingham risk score (kappa=0.47) and high (≥5%) 10-year European systematic coronary risk evaluation score algorithm (kappa=0.47), and substantial agreement with the elevated (≥7.5%) 10-year Pooled Cohort Atherosclerotic CVD risk equation score (kappa=0.63). CONCLUSION: We found a high prevalence of CVD risks in patients from Croatia and Serbia. The ACC/AHA guideline would recommend statins more often than ESC/EAS and EACS guidelines.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".