The Associations Between Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Physical Activity, and Arterial Stiffness in Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this population-based study was to determine if arterial stiffness is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor clustering and physical activity in youth 12-14 years old. We hypothesized that arterial stiffness would be positively associated with CVD risk factor clustering and negatively associated with physical activity in a dose-response manner in this cohort of youth. METHODS: This was a cross sectional study of 485 youth recruited from the 1995 Manitoba birth cohort. The primary outcome, arterial stiffness, was assessed noninvasively using conventional pulse wave analysis and velocity. The primary exposure variables included 1) a measure of cardiometabolic risk, defined as a composite of novel and traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes and 2) self-reported physical activity. RESULTS: Neither cardiometabolic risk factor clustering, nor physical activity were associated with either measure of arterial stiffness in this cohort of youth 12-14 years. Cardiometabolic risk decreased with increasing levels of vigorous physical activity, (P < .05) and increased with increasing body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiometabolic risk factor clustering and physical activity are not associated with arterial stiffness in youth 12-14 years of age. Increased vigorous physical activity is associated with reduced cardiometabolic risk in youth independent of body mass index.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".