Lack of association between serological evidence of past Coxiella burnetii infection and incident ischaemic heart disease: nested case-control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coxiella burnetii causes the common worldwide zoonotic infection, Q fever. It has been previously suggested that patients who had recovered from acute Q fever (whether symptomatic or otherwise) may be at increased risk of ischaemic heart disease. We undertook this study to determine if past infection with Coxiella burnetii, the aetiological agent of Q fever, is a risk factor for the subsequent development of ischaemic heart disease. METHODS: A nested case-control study within the Prospective Epidemiological Study of Myocardial Infarction (PRIME). The PRIME study is a cohort study of 10,593 middle-aged men undertaken in France and Northern Ireland in the 1990s. A total of 335 incident cases of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) were identified and each case was matched to 2 IHD free controls. Q fever seropositivity was determined using a commercial IgG ELISA method. RESULTS: Seroprevalence of Q fever in the controls from Northern Ireland and France were 7.8% and 9.0% respectively. No association was seen between seropositivity and age, smoking, lipid levels, or inflammatory markers. The unadjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for Q fever seropositivity in cases compared to controls was 0.95 (0.59, 1.57). The relationship was substantially unaltered following adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors and potential confounders. CONCLUSION: Serological evidence of past infection with C. burnetii was not found to be associated with an increased risk of IHD.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".