Antiatherogenic potential of red wine: clinician update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complications of atherosclerosis remain the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in industrialized countries. Epidemiological studies have repeatedly demonstrated that moderate alcohol intake has a beneficial effect on cardiovascular disease. The purpose of this review is to examine the epidemiological and biological evidence supporting the intake of red wine as a means of reducing atherosclerosis. On the basis of epidemiological studies, moderate intake of alcoholic beverages, including red wine, reduces the risk of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and peripheral vascular disease in populations. In addition to the favorable biological effects of alcohol on the lipid profile, on hemostatic factors, and in reducing insulin resistance, the phenolic compounds in red wine appear to interfere with the molecular processes underlying the initiation, progression, and rupture of atherosclerotic plaques. Whether red wine is more beneficial than other types of alcohol remains unclear. Definitive data from a large-scale, randomized clinical end-point trial of red wine intake would be required before physicians can advise patients to use wine as part of preventative or medical therapies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".