Familial Aggregation of Diabetes and Hypertension in a Case-Control Study of Colorectal Neoplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Familial aggregation of diseases potentially associated with metabolic syndrome (diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiovascular diseases) was assessed in a colonoscopy-based case-control study of colorectal neoplasia in Toronto and Ottawa, Canada, in 1993-1996. Each familial disease was analyzed by logistic regression using generalized estimating equations. Case probands had incident adenomatous polyps (n = 172) or incident (n = 25) or prevalent (n = 132) colorectal cancer (CRC), while control probands (n = 282) had a negative colonoscopy and no history of CRC or polyps. Significant effect modification was evident in the data, with the strongest positive associations between familial diabetes and colorectal neoplasia among older probands with symptoms (parents: odds ratio (OR) = 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2, 4.8; siblings: OR = 5.8, 95% CI: 2.6, 13.3). Familial hypertension was also associated with colorectal neoplasia among probands with symptoms (OR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6). In stratified analyses, familial diabetes, hypertension, and stroke were positively associated with adenomatous polyps in subgroups of probands who were older and/or had symptoms, while only familial diabetes was possibly associated with CRC. Associations in other proband groups may have been obscured by high cumulative incidence of parental CRC. Family studies are needed to understand the contribution of specific environmental and genetic factors in accounting for the disease aggregations.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".