MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809827709 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.1244

Waist-To-Hip Ratio and Mortality in Heart Failure

2018· article· en· W2809827709 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

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
FundersRelypsaAbbott VascularHartstichtingBoston Scientific CorporationSanofiServierEuropean CommissionAmgenPfizerARCA Biopharma
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureWaistCardiologyWaist–hip ratioInternal medicineBody mass index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: A higher body mass index (BMI) is associated with better survival in heart failure (HF) patients, also known as the obesity paradox. However, BMI does not account for body composition. We therefore analysed the association between abdominal fat, measured via waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), BMI and all-cause mortality in patients with HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: For this analysis, 1738 patients from the Scottish BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure (BIOSTAT-CHF) validation study were included. Patients without waist and hip measurements were excluded. WHR was defined as waist circumference/hip circumference, divided into tertiles and split for sex. A linear regression of principal components from an extensive panel of biomarkers was performed to provide insight in the pathophysiology behind a higher WHR. In total, 1479 patients were included, of which 33% were female and mean age was 75 ±11 years. A higher WHR was independently associated with a higher BMI, a higher prevalence of diabetes and higher New York Heart Association functional class. There was a significant interaction between sex and WHR on its association with mortality (P <0.001). In women, a higher WHR was associated with a higher mortality risk [hazard ratio (HR) 2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37-3.63; P =0.001], whereas no significant association was found in men (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63-1.20; P = 0.409). We found a strong association between a higher WHR and elevated markers of inflammation and MAPK cascade in women, while these associations were less profound in men. CONCLUSIONS: A higher WHR was associated with a higher risk of death in female but not in male HF patients. These findings challenge the obesity paradox, and suggest that fat deposition is pathophysiologically harmful and may be a target for therapy in female patients with HF.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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