Excess psychosocial burden in women with diabetes and premature acute coronary syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Diabetes is a stronger risk factor for acute coronary syndrome for women than men. We investigate whether behavioural and psychosocial factors contribute to the disparity in acute coronary syndrome risk and outcomes among women with diabetes relative to women without diabetes and men. METHODS: Among 939 participants in the GENESIS-PRAXY cohort study of premature acute coronary syndrome (age ≤ 55 years), we compared the prevalence of traditional and non-traditional factors by sex and Type 2 diabetes status. In a case-only analysis, we used generalized logit models to investigate the influence of traditional and non-traditional factors on the interaction of sex and diabetes. RESULTS: In 287 women (14.3% with diabetes) and 652 men (10.4% with diabetes), women and men with diabetes showed a heavier burden of traditional cardiac risk factors compared with individuals without diabetes. Women with diabetes were more likely to be the primary earner and have more anxiety relative to women without diabetes, and reported worse perceived health compared with women without diabetes and men with diabetes. The interaction term for sex and diabetes (odds ratio (OR) 1.40, 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) 0.83-2.36) was diminished after additional adjustment for non-traditional factors (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.54-2.32), but not traditional factors alone (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.84-2.36). CONCLUSIONS: We observed trends toward a more adverse psychosocial profile among women with diabetes and incident acute coronary syndrome compared with women without diabetes and men with diabetes, which may explain the increased risk of acute coronary syndrome in women with diabetes and may also contribute to worse outcomes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".