MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2774670971

Abstract 15861: Adherence to the 2012 Canadian Lipid Screening Guidelines in Primary Prevention Patients: The CANHEART Study

2016· article· en· W2774670971 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jack V. Tu, Anna Chu, Sharon Johnston, Cynthia A. Jackevicius, Laura C. Maclagan, Arlene S. Bierman, William Hogg, Peter C. Austin, Karen Tu, Jacob A. Udell, Clare Atzema, Peter P. Liu, Mostafa Alabousi, Jane J. Park, Dennis T. Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of OttawaInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortHyperlipidemiaAmbulatoryPopulationStatinFamily historyLipid profileInternal medicineCohort studyGerontologyDemographyCholesterolDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The 2012 Canadian Cardiovascular Society’s (CCS) lipid guidelines recommend universal lipid testing of males aged ≥40 and females ≥50 every 3 to 5 years and selective testing in high-risk patients aged Methods: We conducted an analysis of lipid testing and results in 9.4 million primary prevention patients aged 20 to 105, as of January 2008, from Ontario, Canada in the Cardiovascular Health in Ambulatory Care Research Team (CANHEART) ‘big data’ cohort (www.canheart.ca) created through the linkage of multiple population-health databases. This cohort was followed for 5 years up to December 2012 to determine rates of lipid testing by sex and 10-year age bands. We also examined the frequency of elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels (>3.5 mmol/L or 135 mg/dL) in non-statin users and those without a history of hyperlipidemia. At LDLs above this level, consideration of statin therapy is recommended in those at intermediate cardiovascular risk in Canada. Results: Overall, 69.2% of males and 74.1% of females aged 20 to 105 with no past history of cardiovascular disease had lipid testing over the 5-year time period. Rates of testing were highest (>80%) amongst males and females 50 to 79 years, but only 75% of males aged 40 to 49 received testing (Figure). Approximately half of Canadians aged 3.5 mmol/L. The frequency of elevated LDL was greatest in males aged 40 to 49 and females aged 60 to 69, and was lowest in those aged 20 to 29 and aged 80 and over. Conclusions: High rates of lipid testing in Canadians aged 50 to 79 are in concordance with Canadian lipid guidelines. The optimal lipid testing strategy in younger adults and the very elderly remains to be determined.

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)0.007
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 score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health→French-language works237,207→