Role of Stress and Psychosocial Determinants on Women's Cardiovascular Risk and Disease Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The notion that cardiovascular disease (CVD) primarily occurs in men is slowly disappearing. More women than men die of CVD every year, and when women survive, the burden and consequences are worse than in men. Markers of stress and other psychosocial factors have been associated with poor outcomes. Multiple studies have demonstrated sex-based differences in the vascular and endothelial responses to mental stress. Psychosocial stressors were also found to be independent risk factors for the development and progression of CVD. This review arises from accumulating evidence suggesting that psychological well-being may improve cardiac-related outcomes, independent of cardiac risk factors. Despite the fact that positive physician-patient engagement is likely to play a critical role in promoting positive psychological traits and healthy behaviors, current physician awareness and advocacy are rather suboptimal, despite active awareness campaigns such as the American Heart Association's Go Red for Women ® . There is a need to further study the role and management of stress as a CVD risk factor, especially in women, who are disproportionately affected.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".