Risk of Cardiovascular Morbidity in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: A Meta‐Analysis of Observational Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess the magnitude of risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular morbidity in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) compared with the general population through a systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational studies. Methods We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases, as well as abstracts archives from rheumatology conferences. Observational studies that included a PsA diagnosis, cardiovascular or cerebrovascular outcomes, and a comparison group of individuals without psoriasis and rheumatic diseases and were case–control, cross‐sectional, or cohort studies, were assessed by 2 researchers. We calculated weighted pooled summary estimates of the maximally adjusted effect size estimates for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases using the random‐effects model, and tested for heterogeneity using the I 2 statistic. Results Eleven studies, comprising 32,973 patients with PsA, met the inclusion criteria. There was a 43% increased risk of cardiovascular diseases in patients with PsA compared with the general population (pooled odds ratio [OR] 1.43 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.24–1.66]). The risk of incident cardiovascular events was increased by 55% (pooled OR 1.22–1.96). Morbidity risks for myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular diseases, and heart failure were increased by 68%, 22%, and 31%, respectively (pooled OR 1.68 [95% CI 1.31–2.15], pooled OR 1.22 [95% CI 1.05–1.41], and pooled OR 1.31 [95% CI 1.11–1.55], respectively). We identified significant heterogeneity in all main analyses ( P < 0.001). Conclusion Cardiovascular and cerebrovascular morbidity are increased by 43% and 22%, respectively, in patients with PsA compared with the general population.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".