Prognostic Value of Dehydroepiandrosterone Sulfate for Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The aim of the present study was to estimate the impact of dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate ( DHEAS ) on the prognosis of patients with cardiovascular disease by performing a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods and Results The Emb ase, PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, and WanFang databases were searched up to September 5, 2016, to identify eligible studies. The quality of each study was assessed using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale. The association between DHEAS , either on admission or at discharge, and cardiovascular disease outcomes were reviewed. The overall risk ratio for the effect of DHEAS on all‐cause mortality and fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events was pooled using a fixed‐effects or a random‐effects model. The publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots. Twenty‐five studies were included for systematic review. The follow‐up duration ranged from 1 to 19 years. Eighteen studies were included in the meta‐analysis. We found that lower DHEAS levels indicated a significant increased risk for all‐cause mortality (risk ratio, 1.47; 95% CI , 1.38–1.56 [ P <0.00001]), fatal cardiovascular event (risk ratio, 1.58; 95% CI , 1.30–1.91 [ P <0.00001]), and nonfatal cardiovascular event (risk ratio, 1.42; 95% CI , 1.24–1.62 [ P <0.0001]) in patients with cardiovascular disease. Conclusions Patients with cardiovascular disease who have lower DHEAS levels may have poorer prognosis than those with higher DHEAS levels.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| 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".