Cardiovascular risk scoring and magnetic resonance imaging detected subclinical cerebrovascular disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Cardiovascular risk factors are used for risk stratification in primary prevention. We sought to determine if simple cardiac risk scores are associated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-detected subclinical cerebrovascular disease including carotid wall volume (CWV), carotid intraplaque haemorrhage (IPH), and silent brain infarction (SBI). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 7594 adults with no history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) underwent risk factor assessment and a non-contrast enhanced MRI of the carotid arteries and brain using a standardized protocol in a population-based cohort recruited between 2014 and 2018. The non-lab-based INTERHEART risk score (IHRS) was calculated in all participants; the Framingham Risk Score was calculated in a subset who provided blood samples (n = 3889). The association between these risk scores and MRI measures of CWV, carotid IPH, and SBI was determined. The mean age of the cohort was 58 (8.9) years, 55% were women. Each 5-point increase (∼1 SD) in the IHRS was associated with a 9 mm3 increase in CWV, adjusted for sex (P < 0.0001), a 23% increase in IPH [95% confidence interval (CI) 9-38%], and a 32% (95% CI 20-45%) increase in SBI. These associations were consistent for lacunar and non-lacunar brain infarction. The Framingham Risk Score was also significantly associated with CWV, IPH, and SBI. CWV was additive and independent to the risk scores in its association with IPH and SBI. CONCLUSION: Simple cardiovascular risk scores are significantly associated with the presence of MRI-detected subclinical cerebrovascular disease, including CWV, IPH, and SBI in an adult population without known clinical CVD.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".