Modifications of Cardiovascular Risk Scores, But Not Standard Risk Scores, Improve Identification of Asymptomatic Coronary Artery Disease in Psoriatic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have an increased prevalence of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and are at greater risk for subsequent major CV events compared with the general population1. The standardized prevalence ratio for coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with PsA ranges from 1.3 to 2.572. Similar to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and severe psoriasis, patients with PsA have been found to have a high risk of major adverse CV events, even after adjustment for traditional risk factors3. Previous studies have reported higher prevalence of coronary artery plaques both in psoriasis and in RA patients without a diagnosis of CAD, compared to controls4,5. We have recently examined coronary artery plaque burden in patients with PsA, and have found that PsA is associated with accelerated coronary plaque formation, which was independent of metabolic disease6. We read with interest the article in The Journal by Shen, et al 7. They used screening for carotid plaques as a tool for CV disease risk assessment because carotid plaques are associated with future acute coronary syndrome, albeit in … Address correspondence to Dr. M. Haroon, Consultant Rheumatologist, Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University Hospital Kerry, Co. Kerry, Ireland. E-mail: mharoon301{at}hotmail.com
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".