Proteinuria as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality in older people: a prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prognostic significance of proteinuria in older people is not well defined. We examined the associations between proteinuria and incident coronary heart disease, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality in older people. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Casual dipstick proteinuria was determined in 1,045 men (mean [+/- SD] age 68 +/- 7 years) and 1,541 women (mean age 69 +/- 7 years) attending the 15th biennial examination of the Framingham Heart Study. Participants were divided by grade of proteinuria: none (85.3%), trace (10.2%), and greater-than-trace (4.5%). Cox proportional hazards analyses were used to determine the relations of baseline proteinuria to the specified outcomes, adjusting for other risk factors, including serum creatinine level. RESULTS: During 17 years of follow-up, there were 455 coronary heart disease events, 412 cardiovascular disease deaths, and 1,214 deaths. In men, baseline proteinuria was associated with all-cause mortality (hazards ratio [HR] = 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0 to 1.7 for trace proteinuria; HR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.8 for greater-than-trace proteinuria; P for trend = 0.02). In women, trace proteinuria was associated with cardiovascular disease death (HR = 1. 6, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.4), and all-cause mortality (HR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.7). CONCLUSION: Proteinuria is a significant, although relatively weak, risk factor for all-cause mortality in men and women, and for cardiovascular disease mortality in 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".