MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 18267: Coronary Risk Factors and Prevalence and Severity of Coronary Atherosclerosis in the Young

2012· article· en· W2297892291 on OpenAlexaff
Heidi Gransar, Damini Dey, Fay Y. Lin, Victor Cheng, Stephan Achenbach, Mouaz H. Al‐Mallah, Matthew J. Budoff, Filippo Cademartiri, Tracy Q. Callister, Hyuk‐Jae Chang, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Augustin DeLago, Martin Hadamitzky, LesLee Shaw, Allison Dunning, Todd C. Villines, James K. Min

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary atherosclerosisInternal medicineCoronary heart diseaseCardiologyRisk factorCoronary disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose. We examined the relationship between coronary risk factors (RF) and prevalence and severity of coronary atherosclerosis in young individuals undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA). Methods. Of 27125 patients undergoing CCTA, 1635 young (50%stenosis), and presences of calcified plaque (CP) and non-calcified plaque (NCP). Results. Among 1635 subjects (70% men, age 38±6 years), 6% had diabetes (DM), 31% had hypertension (HTN), 37% had dyslipidemia (CHOL), 21% had smoking (SM) and 33% had family history (FH) of CAD. Among all young individuals, any CAD, obs CAD, CP and NCP were observed in 19%, 4%, 5%, and 8%, respectively. Compared to women, men demonstrated higher rates of any CAD (21% vs 12% P<0.001), CP (6% vs 3% P=0.01), and NCP (9% vs 5% P=0.008), although no difference was observed for rates of obs CAD (5% vs. 4% P=NS). Any CAD, obs CAD, and NCP were higher for young individuals with DM, HTN, CHOL, SM or FH of CAD; while only DM and CHOL were associated with CP (Table). In multivariable analysis adjusting for sex and RFs, male sex was the strongest predictor for any CAD (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.95, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.43-2.66, P<0.001), CP (OR 1.46, 95%CI 1.08-1.98, P=0.014) and NCP (OR 1.33, 95%CI 1.06-1.67, P=0.014); while FH of CAD was the strongest predictor for obs CAD (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.65-4.45, P3 RFs manifesting a significant increase in any CAD (P<0.001 for trend); obs CAD (P<0.001 for trend); NCP (P<0.001 for trend) and CP (P=0.008 for trend). Conclusions. CAD is present in 1 in 5 young individuals, with sex and coronary RFs associated with increasing presence and severity of CAD.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→