MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283500310 · doi:10.14288/1.0092263

Cardiovascular risk factors of first degree relatives with family history of premature atherosclerotic disease

2009· article· en· W2283500310 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Evelyn Wu

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily historyFirst-degree relativesDiseaseMedicineAtherosclerotic cardiovascular diseaseDegree (music)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of premature (men <50 years; women <60 years) coronary heart disease (CHD) in a first-degree relative is a significant and independent risk factor for cardiovascular, peripheral vascular and cerebrovascular disease. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with premature CHD (index patients) have increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease compared to those without a family history. The purpose of this study was to determine whether FDRs had higher prevalence and severity of traditional and non-traditional cardiovascular risk factors compared to the general Canadian population. Index patients and their FDRs (parents, siblings, and children) were recruited for the Family Atherosclerosis Counseling and Testing Study (FACTS). Cardiovascular risk assessment included measurements of lipid and biochemical markers, sociodemographic factors, anthropometry measures, as well as dietary, exercise, and smoking histories. Cardiovascular risk factors in FDRs were compared to a case-matched M-CHAT (Multicultural Community Health Assessment Trial) control population. Male index patients had significantly higher median values of body-mass-index (BMI; p = 0.002), waist circumference (p <0.001), systolic blood pressure (p = 0.026) and diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.001) than male FDRs. Median lipoprotein(a) values were higher in male index patients than their male FDRs (p = 0.014); no differences were observed between female index patients and female FDRs (p = 0.238). Though both groups were comparable in age (p = 0.130), FDR siblings had similar risk factors as index patients, except more FDR siblings were non smokers {p = 0.048) and FDR siblings were more educated (p = 0.044). Index patients and their FDR siblings had comparable median lipoprotein(a) values at 176 mg/L (102 - 476 mg/L) and 182 mg/L (59 - 474 mg/L), respectively (p = 0.516). Also, there was a higher prevalence of abdominal obesity in F DR siblings than in the index patients, which did not reach statistical significance. In general, FDRs had similar prevalence and severity of traditional lifestyle habits and cardiovascular risk factors as the M - C H A T controls. Both the FDRs and the controls were relatively healthy: over 92% of the female and 85% of the male FDRs were classified as 'lowrisk' according to the Framingham risk score, even after adjusting for positive family history., However, there were distinct differences between FDRs and controls in the frequency of elevated non-traditional risk factors, even after adjusting for age. Median lipoprotein(a) values were comparable between female FDRs at 218 (63 - 483) mg/L and female controls at 177 (96 - 270) mg/L (p - 0.331). Male FDRs, on the other hand, had significantly lower lipoprotein(a) than male controls at 105 (45 - 238) mg/L and 192 (88 - 377) mg/L, respectively (p = 0.022). Mean serum homocysteine levels were higher in both male and female FDRs at 10.9 ± 0.5 plM and 9.0 ± 0.3 |JM, compared to 8.5 ± 0.2 \xM and 7.3 ± 0.2 \xM for male and female controls, respectively (p <0.001). Mean C-reactive protein values were 1.8 ± 0.2 mg/L in male and 2.5 ± 0.2 mg/L in female FDRs; they did not differ significantly from the controls at 1.7 ± 0.3 mg/L for men and 1.7 ± 0.3 mg/L for women (p = 0.272).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.161 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207