MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2265227815 · doi:10.1161/str.44.suppl_1.awp191

Abstract WP191: Framingham Stroke Risk Score and Stroke Mortality Among Canadian Adults

2013· article· en· W2265227815 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter T. Katzmarzyk, Bruce Reeder, Susan J. Elliott, Michel Joffres

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Framingham Heart StudyHazard ratioFramingham Risk ScoreProportional hazards modelBody mass indexPopulationDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineAtrial fibrillationPhysical therapyDemographyConfidence intervalDiseaseEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Stroke is a leading cause of mortality among Canadian adults. There is currently very little information on the utility of stroke prediction algorithms for the Canadian population. The purpose of this study was to determine if the Framingham stroke risk prediction model (D’Agostino et al. Stroke 1994;25:40-43) was associated with stroke mortality in a population-based sample of Canadian adults. Methods: The sample included 3,163 adults 55-74 y of age who participated in the Canadian Heart Health Surveys (1986-95) and were free from stroke at baseline. The analysis includes all deaths that occurred between baseline data collection and December, 2004. A modified Framingham Stroke Score was assigned to each participant at baseline based on their age, sex, treated or untreated systolic blood pressure levels, diabetes, smoking, and history of cardiovascular disease. Data on history of atrial fibrillation and left ventricular hypertrophy were not available. Hazard ratios for all-cause and stroke mortality were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression with exam year as a covariate, and multivariable models also included body mass index, alcohol consumption and education level as covariates. Results: There were 915 deaths (70 from stroke) over 12.2 y (0.5 to 16 y) of follow-up. The hazard ratios (95% C.I.) for all-cause mortality associated with the Framingham Stroke Score were 1.12 (1.10 - 1.15) in men and 1.18 (1.15 - 1.22) in women. The hazard ratios for stroke mortality were 1.15 (1.06 - 1.25) in men and 1.22 (1.11 - 1.36) in women. When comparing men and women with scores greater than 8 and 9, respectively (median) to those with lower scores, the hazard ratios were 2.34 (1.20 - 4.58) in men and 4.81 (1.85 - 12.50) in women. The additional inclusion of body mass index, alcohol consumption and education to the models did not appreciably change the results. Conclusions: The Framingham Stroke Score is a significant predictor of all-cause and stroke mortality in Canadian adults, and the risk is independent of body mass index, alcohol consumption and education level.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207