MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137937798 · doi:10.1586/14779072.2015.1101342

Predicting cardiovascular disease from handgrip strength: the potential clinical implications

2015· editorial· en· W2137937798 on OpenAlexaff
Darryl P. Leong, Koon Teo

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2015
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)DiseaseMuscle strengthPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntensive care medicineSarcopeniaCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The measurement of handgrip strength has proven prognostic value for all-cause and cardiovascular death, and for cardiovascular disease. It is also an important indicator of frailty and vulnerability. The measurement of handgrip strength may be most useful in the context of multi-morbidity, where it may be a simple tool to identify the individual at particularly high risk of adverse outcomes, who may benefit from closer clinical attention. Research into dietary, exercise, and pharmacologic strategies to increase muscle strength is ongoing. Important issues will be the feasibility and sustainability of increases in muscle strength, and whether these increases translate into clinical benefit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.010
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207