MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769892250 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.170025

Underestimation of Risk of Carotid Subclinical Atherosclerosis by Cardiovascular Risk Scores in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis

2017· article· en· W2769892250 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiayun Shen, Steven Ho Man Lam, Qing Shang, Chun Kwok Wong, Edmund K. Li, Priscilla Wong, E. W. Kun, Isaac T Cheng, Martin Li, Tena K. Li, Tracy Y. Zhu, Jack Jock-Wai Lee, Mimi Chang, Alex Pui‐Wai Lee, Lai‐Shan Tam

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineFramingham Risk ScorePsoriatic arthritisCardiologySubclinical infectionRheumatismBlood pressureRisk factorDiabetes mellitusRisk assessmentArthritisDiseaseEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To test the performances of established cardiovascular (CV) risk scores in discriminating subclinical atherosclerosis (SCA) in patients with psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: These scores were calculated: Framingham risk score (FRS), QRISK2, Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk algorithm (ASCVD) from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association, and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)-recommended modified versions (by 1.5 multiplication factor, m-). Carotid intima-media thickness > 0.9 mm and/or the presence of plaque determined by ultrasound were classified as SCA+. RESULTS: We recruited 146 patients [49.4 ± 10.2 yrs, male: 90 (61.6%)], of whom 142/137/128/118 patients were eligible to calculate FRS/QRISK2/SCORE/ASCVD. Further, 62 (42.5%) patients were SCA+ and were significantly older, with higher systolic blood pressure and higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (all p < 0.05). All CV risk scores were significantly higher in patients with SCA+ [FRS: 7.8 (3.9-16.5) vs 2.7 (1.1-7.8), p < 0.001; QRISK2: 5.5 (3.1-10.2) vs 2.9 (1.2-6.3), p < 0.001; SCORE: 1 (0-2) vs 0 (0-1), p < 0.001; ASCVD: 5.6 (2.6-12.4) vs 3.4 (1.4-6.1), p = 0.001]. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test revealed moderate goodness of fit for the 4 CV scores (p ranged from 0.087 to 0.686). However, of the patients with SCA+, those identified as high risk were only 44.1% (by FRS > 10%), 1.8% (QRISK2 > 20%), 10.9% (SCORE > 5%), and 43.6% (ASCVD > 7.5%). By applying the EULAR multiplication factor, 50.8%/14.3%/14.5%/54.5% of the patients with SCA+ were identified as high risk by m-FRS/m-QRISK2/m-SCORE/m-ASCVD, respectively. EULAR modification increased the sensitivity of FRS and ASCVD in discriminating SCA+ from 44% to 51%, and 44% to 55%, respectively. CONCLUSION: All CV risk scores underestimated the SCA+ risk. EULAR-recommended modification improved the sensitivity of FRS and ASCVD only to a moderate level.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207