Association between angiotensinogen M235T polymorphism and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate the relationship between angiotensinogen (AGT) gene M235T polymorphism and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) to explore the potential role of the AGT polymorphism in HCM. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, OVID, Cochrane library, CNKI, Wan Fang Database were searched to identify the studies involving AGT M235T polymorphism and HCM. Two authors performed independent literature review and study quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) checklist. A random-effects model was used to calculate the overall combined risk estimates. RESULTS: Nine studies involving 887 cases and 1407 controls were included in our meta-analysis. No significant associations were found between AGT M235T polymorphism and HCM (allele model T vs M: OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.95-1.45; dominant model TT vs (MM/MT): OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.00-1.45; recessive model (TT/MT) vs MM: OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.87-1.45; heterozygous comparison MT vs MM: OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.82-1.41; homozygous comparison TT vs MM OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.88-1.61. In subgroup analysis, the significant difference of association between AGT M235T polymorphism and HCM existed in Asian and sporadic hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (SHCM), but no significant difference was found in Europeans and familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (FHCM). CONCLUSIONS: There is no association between AGT M235T polymorphism and HCM in general populations, but such a relationship exists in Asians and SHCM.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".