MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long-Term Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Women Who Have Had Infants With Heart Defects

2018· article· en· W2796304878 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nathalie Auger, Brian J. Potter, Marianne Bilodeau‐Bertrand, Gilles Paradis

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioHeart diseaseProportional hazards modelIncidence (geometry)PediatricsConfidence intervalCohortPregnancyHeart failureCohort studyComorbidityPreeclampsiaInternal medicineObstetrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The possibility that congenital heart defects signal a familial predisposition to cardiovascular disease has not been investigated. We aimed to determine whether the risk of cardiovascular disorders later in life was higher for women who have had newborns with congenital heart defects. METHODS: We studied a cohort of 1 084 251 women who had delivered infants between 1989 and 2013 in Quebec, Canada. We identified women whose infants had critical, noncritical, or no heart defects, and tracked the women over time for future hospitalizations for cardiovascular disease, with follow-up extending up to 25 years past pregnancy. We calculated the incidence of cardiovascular hospitalization per 1000 person-years, and used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between infant heart defects and risk of maternal cardiovascular hospitalization. Models were adjusted for age, parity, preeclampsia, comorbidity, material deprivation, and time period. RESULTS: Women whose infants had heart defects had a higher overall incidence of cardiovascular hospitalization. There were 3.38 cardiovascular hospitalizations per 1000 person-years for those with critical defects (95% CI, 2.67-4.27), 3.19 for noncritical defects (95% CI, 2.96-3.45), and 2.42 for no heart defects (95% CI, 2.39-2.44). In comparison with no heart defects, women whose infants had critical defects had a hazard ratio of 1.43 (95% CI, 1.13-1.82) for any cardiovascular hospitalization, and women whose infants had noncritical defects had a hazard ratio of 1.24 (95% CI, 1.15-1.34), in adjusted models. Risks of specific causes of cardiovascular hospitalization, including myocardial infarction, heart failure, and other atherosclerotic disorders, were also greater for mothers of infants with congenital heart defects than with no defects. CONCLUSIONS: Women whose infants have congenital heart defects have a greater risk of cardiovascular hospitalization later in life. Congenital heart defects in offspring may be an early marker of predisposition to cardiovascular disease.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations29
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207