<i>Chlamydia pneumoniae</i> and Atherosclerosis following Carotid Endarterectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Seroepidemiological studies have shown an association between raised antibody titres against Chlamydia pneumoniae, and carotid atherosclerosis or stroke. However, direct evidence for a causal link between arterial infection with C. pneumoniae and carotid disease remains weak. We hypothesized that long-term follow-up of patients with pathologically-proven arterial C. pneumoniae infection might provide further insight into the role of C. pneumoniae in carotid atherosclerosis. METHODS: We followed a cohort of 70 carotid endarterectomy patients for ipsilateral restenosis, contralateral progression, and all-cause mortality (four year median follow-up period). All patients had presence or absence of C. pneumoniae in their carotid plaques documented by immunohistochemistry after endarterectomy. A survival function was generated and the log-rank test was used to assess the difference in survival between subjects with and without documented chlamydial infection in their plaque. RESULTS: Baseline demographic and cardiovascular risk factors were similar between the two groups, and survival analysis demonstrated no difference (p>0.05) in all-cause mortality, or all-cause mortality combined with restenosis and progression. CONCLUSIONS: Our data finds no causal role for C. pneumoniae in restenosis or progression of carotid disease or mortality in this patient population with advanced carotid atherosclerosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".