Cardiovascular disease and related risk factors in adults with cerebral palsy: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To summarize the literature on the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD), risk factors of CVD, and CVD-related mortality in adults with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: A systematic review was conducted by searching the PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), Cochrane, and CINAHL databases. Selection criteria included adults with CP aged 18 years or over. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies. Data were reported descriptively. RESULTS: Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Only one study reported directly on the presence of CVD in adults with CP, which found adults with CP reported greater CVD conditions than adults without CP (15.1 vs 9.1%, p<0.001). The most commonly reported risk factor of CVD in adults with CP was overweight/obesity. Five studies included data on CVD-related mortality in persons with CP, where CVD-related and circulatory system-related deaths were elevated and more common at a younger age in adults with CP than in the general population. INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of CVD and the risk of death because of CVD in this population seems increased, though the knowledge base is fragmented by studies that are small in size and geographically isolated. Further research is required to understand prevalence of risk factors among adults with CP, in particular overweight/obesity. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Overweight and obesity are risk factors of cardiovascular disease (CVD) that are commonly reported in adults with cerebral palsy (CP). CVD-related and circulatory system-related deaths are elevated in individuals with CP compared to the general population.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".