Cardiovascular and Lifestyle Risk Factors and Cognitive Function in Patients With Stable Coronary Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
or placebo was evaluated for 10 634 patients with coronary heart disease from 38 countries in the STABILITY (Stabilization of Atherosclerotic Plaque by Initiation of Darapladib Therapy) trial. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores for darapladib and placebo groups were similar (mean± SD , 25.3±3.84 versus 25.4±3.73, respectively; P=0.27) and the adjusted odds ratio ( OR ) for mild cognitive impairment (Montreal Cognitive Assessment score <26) was 1.00 (95% CI , 0.93-1.09). Mild cognitive impairment was more likely with increasing age ( OR , 1.33 [1.27-1.41], +5 years after 65). For other baseline clinical characteristics, the strongest independent predictors of cognitive impairment were education (≤8 years versus college/university, OR , 2.95 [2.60-3.35]; >8 years/trade school versus college/university, OR , 1.38 [1.25-1.52] and geographic grouping). Cardiovascular risk factors independently associated with cognitive impairment were history of stroke ( OR , 1.43 [1.20-1.71]); <2.5 hours of moderate or vigorous intensity exercise/week ( OR , 1.19 [1.04-1.37]); high-density lipoprotein cholesterol <1.16 mmol/L ( OR , 1.19 [1.04-1.37]); diabetes mellitus requiring treatment ( OR , yes versus no: 1.15 [1.05-1.26]); and history of hypertension ( OR , 1.12 [1.02-1.23]). Conclusions In patients with stable coronary heart disease, cognitive performance was associated with modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, educational level, and global region, but was not influenced by darapladib. Clinical Trial Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 00799903.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".