MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808971680 · doi:10.1093/ije/dyy114

Errors in estimating usual sodium intake by the Kawasaki formula alter its relationship with mortality: implications for public health†

2018· article· en· W2808971680 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Epidemiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSodium Intake and Health
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsSodiumConfidence intervalUrineMedicineGold standard (test)CohortUrinary systemUrine sodiumUrine collection deviceInternal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Several cohort studies with inaccurate estimates of sodium reported a J-shaped relationship with mortality. We compared various estimated sodium intakes with that measured by the gold-standard method of multiple non-consecutive 24-h urine collections and assessed their relationship with mortality. Methods: We analysed the Trials of Hypertension Prevention follow-up data. Sodium intake was assessed in four ways: (i) average measured (gold standard): mean of three to seven 24-h urinary sodium measurements during the trial periods; (ii) average estimated: mean of three to seven estimated 24-h urinary sodium excretions from sodium concentration of 24-h urine using the Kawasaki formula; (iii) first measured: 24-h urinary sodium measured at the beginning of each trial; (iv) first estimated: 24-h urinary sodium estimated from sodium concentration of the first 24-h urine using the Kawasaki formula. We included 2974 individuals aged 30-54 years with pre-hypertension, not assigned to sodium intervention. Results: During a median follow-up of 24 years, 272 deaths occurred. The average sodium intake measured by the gold-standard method was 3769 ± 1282 mg/d. The average estimated sodium over-estimated the intake by 1297 mg/d (95% confidence interval: 1267-1326). The average estimated value was systematically biased with over-estimation at lower levels and under-estimation at higher levels. The average measured sodium showed a linear relationship with mortality. The average estimated sodium appeared to show a J-shaped relationship with mortality. The first measured and the first estimated sodium both flattened the relationship. Conclusions: Accurately measured sodium intake showed a linear relationship with mortality. Inaccurately estimated sodium changed the relationship and could explain much of the paradoxical J-shaped findings reported in some cohort studies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.213 · 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