Association Between Alexithymia and Risk of Incident Cardiovascular Diseases in the SUpplémentation en VItamines et Minéraux AntioXydants (SU.VI.MAX) Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although it has been suggested that alexythymia is associated with cardiovascular diseases, studies are scarce and a causal relationship is questionable. This study explored the prospective association between alexithymia and cardiovascular events in middle-aged participants without cardiovascular history at baseline. METHODS: The 26-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-26) was completed by 5586 participants of the French SUpplémentation en VItamines et Minéraux AntioXydants cohort (41.4% of men, M [SD] age = 52.2 [6.3] years) in 1996-1997. Covariates measured at baseline included age, occupational status, depressive symptoms, smoking status, body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertriglyceridemia. The follow-up ran from January 1, 1998, to the date of the first cardiovascular event, the date of death or September 1, 2007, whichever occurred first. Cardiovascular events were validated by an independent expert committee. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were computed with Cox regressions. RESULTS: During an average of 8.9 years of follow-up, 171 first cardiovascular events were validated. After adjustment for age, sex, and occupational status, there was no association between baseline alexithymia and cardiovascular events at follow-up (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] for 15 points of TAS-26 = 1.00 [0.81-1.23], p > .99). Adjusting for all covariates, using binary TAS-26 cut-offs or TAS-26 subscores yielded similar nonsignificant results. CONCLUSIONS: In this large prospective study, alexithymia and cardiovascular events were not associated among a nonclinical population. This casts some doubt on whether alexithymia could be a meaningful target in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00272428).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".