Urban and Rural Differences of Acute Cardiovascular Disease Events: A Study from the Population-Based Real-Time Surveillance System in Zhejiang, China in 2012
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zhejiang province, China, has implemented a population based, real-time surveillance system that tracks acute cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) events since 2001. This study aimed to describe the system and report CVD incidence, mortality and case-fatality between urban and rural areas in Zhejiang in 2012. The surveillance system employs a stratified random sampling method covering all permanent residents of 30 counties/districts in Zhejiang. Acute CVD events such as coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke were defined, registered and reviewed based on the adapted MONICA (Monitoring Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease) definitions. Data were collected from health facilities, vital registries, supplementary surveys, and additional investigations, and were checked for data quality before input in the system. We calculated the rates and compared them by gender, age and region. In 2012, the incidence, mortality and case-fatality of total acute CVD events were 367.0 (CHD 59.1, stroke 307.9), 127.1 (CHD 43.3, stroke 83.8) per 100,000 and 34.6% (CHD 73.2%, stroke 27.2%), respectively. Compared with rural areas, urban areas reported higher incidence and mortality but lower case-fatality rates for CHD (P<0.001), while lower incidence but higher mortality and case-fatality rates for stroke (P<0.001). We found significant differences on CHD and stroke epidemics between urban and rural areas in Zhejiang. Special attentions need to be given to stroke control, especially in rural areas.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it