The hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype and the risk of coronary artery disease: results from the EPIC-Norfolk Prospective Population Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screening for increased waist circumference and hypertriglyceridemia (the hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype) has been proposed as an inexpensive approach to identify patients with excess intra-abdominal adiposity and associated metabolic abnormalities. We examined the relationship between the hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype to the risk of coronary artery disease in apparently healthy individuals. METHODS: A total of 21,787 participants aged 45-79 years were followed for a mean of 9.8 (standard deviation 1.7) years. Coronary artery disease developed in 2109 of them during follow-up. The hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype was defined as a waist circumference of 90 cm or more and a triglyceride level of 2.0 mmol/L or more in men, and a waist circumference of 85 cm or more and a triglyceride level of 1.5 mmol/L or more in women. RESULTS: Compared with participants who had a waist circumference and triglyceride level below the threshold, those with the hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype had higher blood pressure indices, higher levels of apolipoprotein B and C-reactive protein, lower levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein A-I, and smaller low-density lipoprotein particles. Among men, those with the hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype had an unadjusted hazard ratio for future coronary artery disease of 2.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.02-2.87) compared with men who did not have the phenotype. Women with the phenotype had an unadjusted hazard ratio of 3.84 (95% CI 3.20-4.62) compared with women who did not have the phenotype. INTERPRETATION: Among participants from a European cohort representative of a contemporary Western population, the hypertriglyceridemic-waist phenotype was associated with a deteriorated cardiometabolic risk profile and an increased risk for coronary artery disease.
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 | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".