MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Long-Term Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease in Young Men

2002· letter· en· W2088074640 on OpenAlexaff
Apoor S. Gami, Víctor M. Montori, Steven A. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2002
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureCoronary heart diseaseInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Letters16 April 2002Long-Term Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease in Young MenApoor S. Gami, MN, Victor M. Montori, MD, and Steven A. Smith, MDApoor S. Gami, MNMayo Clinic; Rochester, MN 55905 (Gami, Montori, Smith)Search for more papers by this author, Victor M. Montori, MDMayo Clinic; Rochester, MN 55905 (Gami, Montori, Smith)Search for more papers by this author, and Steven A. Smith, MDMayo Clinic; Rochester, MN 55905 (Gami, Montori, Smith)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-136-8-200204160-00016 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR:Navas-Nacher and colleagues (1) discussed the impact of risk factors (age, serum cholesterol level, systolic blood pressure, and cigarette smoking) for coronary heart disease (CHD) on men 18 to 39 years of age. They found a significant association between these risk factors and death from CHD over 20 years.The authors described measuring plasma glucose levels in the 11 016 participants. However, they did not report plasma glucose levels at baseline and apparently did not explore the association between glycemia and cardiovascular mortality. We would like to know whether a significant association existed between plasma glucose levels ...References1. Navas-Nacher EL, Colangelo L, Beam C, Greenland P. Risk factors for coronary heart disease in men 18 to 39 years of age. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:433-9. [PMID: 11255518] LinkGoogle Scholar2. Fuller JH, Shipley MJ, Rose G, Jarrett RJ, Keen H. Mortality from coronary heart disease and stroke in relation to degree of glycaemia: the Whitehall study. Br Med J Clin Res Ed. 1983;287:867-70. [PMID: 6412862] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Castelli WP. Cardiovascular disease in women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1988;158:1553-60, 1566-7. [PMID: 3377033] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Coutinho M, Gerstein HC, Wang Y, Yusuf S. The relationship between glucose and incident cardiovascular events. A metaregression analysis of published data from 20 studies of 95,783 individuals followed for 12.4 years. Diabetes Care. 1999;22:233-40. [PMID: 10333939] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Khaw KT, Wareham N, Luben R, Bingham S, Oakes S, Welch A, et al . Glycated haemoglobin, diabetes, and mortality in men in Norfolk cohort of european prospective investigation of cancer and nutrition (EPIC-Norfolk). BMJ. 2001;322:15-8. [PMID: 11141143] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Mayo Clinic; Rochester, MN 55905 (Gami, Montori, Smith) PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoRisk Factors for Coronary Heart Disease in Men 18 to 39 Years of Age Elena L. Navas-Nacher , Laura Colangelo , Craig Beam , and Philip Greenland Long-Term Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease in Young Men Philip Greenland and Laura Colangelo Metrics 16 April 2002Volume 136, Issue 8Page: 631KeywordsBlood plasmaCholesterolCohort studiesCongenital heart diseaseCoronary heart diseaseGlucoseHemoglobinMedical risk factorsMortalitySystolic pressure ePublished: 16 April 2002 Issue Published: 16 April 2002 CopyrightCopyright © 2002 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF DownloadLoading ...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal Medicine→Same topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins→French-language works237,207→