Factors Associated with the Risk of Developing Coronary Artery Disease in Medicated Patients with Major Depressive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with high Framingham Risk Score (FRS) in medicated patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: We examined 61 medicated patients with MDD (mean age 37.77 ± 7.67, 90.2% women) and 43 non-depressed controls (mean age 38.26 ± 9.20, 90.7% women). We administered the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and measured systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), mean arterial BP (MAP), pulse wave velocity (PWV), intima-media thickness (IMT), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and triglycerides. Results: We found that medicated patients with MDD had significantly higher levels of HAM-D score (p < 0.01), SBP (p = 0.015), MAP (p = 0.037), IL−6 level (p = 0.007), as compared with controls. Medicated patients who remained moderately to severely depressed showed significantly higher SBP (p = 0.049), DBP (p = 0.009), MAP (p = 0.024), IL−6 level (p = 0.019), left PWV (p = 0.004) and average PWV (p = 0.026) than those with mild depression. Multivariate regression showed that the interaction effect between HAM-D score and triglyceride level (p = 0.018) was significantly associated with FRS in medicated patients with MDD. Conclusions: This study highlights that the interaction effect of the severity of depression and the triglyceride level, was a modifiable factor positively associated with high FRS.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".