MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912407504 · doi:10.1161/str.50.suppl_1.tmp55

Abstract TMP55: Abdominal Obesity Predicts Stroke Risk in the Framingham Study

2019· article· en· W2912407504 on OpenAlexaff
Hugo J. Aparicio, Serkalem Demissie, Jayandra J. Himali, Matthew P. Pase, Claudia L. Satizábal, Kimberly A. Dukes, Vasileios‐Arsenios Lioutas, José R. Romero, Ramachandran S. Vasan, Alexa Beiser, Sudha Seshadri

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsKimberly-Clark (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWaistStroke (engine)Hazard ratioBody mass indexAbdominal obesityFramingham Heart StudyFramingham Risk ScoreCohortProportional hazards modelWaist–hip ratioCohort studyInternal medicinePhysical therapyConfidence intervalDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Previous studies have suggested that measurements of abdominal fat, such as waist circumference or waist-to-hip ratio, more accurately predict risk of stroke than body mass index (BMI). We assessed the risk of ischemic stroke associated with BMI, waist circumference, and waist-to-hip ratio in a community sample. Methods: We pooled Framingham Heart Study (FHS) participant data from FHS clinic examinations for the Original cohort (Exam 21, date range 1988-1992) and Offspring cohort (Exam 4, 1987-1991, and Exam 7, 1998-2001). Offspring participants who did not have stroke at the end of the first 10-year observation period could contribute data to the subsequent observation period. We included stroke-free participants 45 years of age or older who obtained measurements of BMI (kg/m 2 ) and both waist and hip circumference. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to separately relate BMI, waist circumference, and waist-to-hip ratio to risk of incident ischemic stroke over 10 years. Results: We analyzed data from 6,533 observation periods (mean age of participants 62±10 years, 54% female) with mean follow up time of 9.2 ±2 years. There were 240 (3.7%) incident ischemic stroke events. Each of the three body weight measurements was associated with increased stroke risk in models that adjusted for age and sex (Table). In full models, additionally adjusting for vascular risk factors that are more frequent in obese persons, only waist-to-hip ratio predicted risk of ischemic stroke. The hazard ratio (HR) per standard deviation increase in waist-to-hip ratio was 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.37, p=0.030. Conclusions: Higher waist-to-hip ratio predicted 10-year risk of ischemic stroke. Waist-to-hip ratio is a simple measure of abdominal obesity that should be used in future studies investigating weight loss interventions for stroke prevention.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207