MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lipid assessment, metabolic syndrome and coronary heart disease risk

2010· article· en· W2158783217 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Clinical Investigation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersMedical Research CouncilEuropean CommissionResearch Councils UKBritish Heart FoundationCancer Research UK
KeywordsInternal medicineApolipoprotein BCholesterolMedicineLipoproteinNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyPopulationNational Cholesterol Education ProgramHigh-density lipoproteinMetabolic syndromeChemistryEndocrinologyObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although the total to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (TC/HDL-C) has been used for decades to identify individuals at risk for coronary heart disease (CHD), apolipoprotein-based (apolipoprotein B/apolipoprotein A-I [apoB/apoA-I]) and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR)-based lipoprotein concentrations (low-density lipoprotein(NMR) /high-density lipoprotein(NMR) [LDL(NMR) /HDL(NMR)]) may also be useful for CHD risk stratification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a case-control study conducted within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Norfolk study population, 870 individuals who developed CHD during a 6-year follow-up were matched to 1659 controls on the basis of gender, age and enrollment time. LDL(NMR) and HDL(NMR) were measured by proton NMR spectroscopy. RESULTS: After adjusting for traditional CHD risk factors, men in the top quintile of the various lipoprotein ratios proved to be at increased CHD risk (OR = 2·59 [95% IC, 1·76-3·83] for TC/HDL-C ratio, 2·59 [1·75-3·83] for apoB/apoA-I ratio and 2·78 [1·86-4·17] for LDL(NMR) /HDL(NMR) ratio) compared with men in the bottom quintile. Similar associations were observed in women (OR = 2·86 [1·71-4·80] for TC/HDL-C ratio, 2·94 [1·74-4·97] for apoB/apoA-I ratio and 2·03 [1·21-3·43] for LDL(NMR)/HDL(NMR) ratio). Compared with participants with only one component of the metabolic syndrome, those who had five had an increased TC/HDL-C ratio (73·0% and 80·4% in men and women respectively), apoB/apoA-I ratio (58·0% and 62·9% in men and women respectively) and for LDL(NMR)/HDL(NMR) ratio (52·6% and 54·1% in men and women respectively). CONCLUSION: In this European study population, the TC/HDL-C, apoB/apoA-I and LDL(NMR) /HDL(NMR) ratios were similarly associated with components of the metabolic syndrome and CHD risk.

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.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.295 · 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