Diabetes Mellitus Is Associated With Increased Risk of Ischemic Stroke in Patients With and Without Coronary Artery Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose— Diabetes mellitus (DM) and non-DM patients without coronary artery disease (CAD) have a similar low risk of myocardial infarction after coronary angiography. The risk of ischemic stroke in DM patients dependent on CAD status is less explored. We examined whether DM patients without CAD have a risk of ischemic stroke similar to that in patients with neither DM nor CAD. Methods— We conducted a cohort study of patients who underwent coronary angiography between 2004 and 2012 in Western Denmark. Patients diagnosed with previous ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack were excluded. Patients were stratified according to the presence of DM and CAD. Follow-up started 30 days after coronary angiography. We computed event rates and adjusted incidence rate ratios using patients without DM or CAD as reference. We examined the trend between CAD extent and ischemic stroke in patients with DM. Results— A total of 81 909 patients were included. Median follow-up was 3.8 years. Patients with both DM and CAD were at the highest risk of ischemic stroke (1.32 events per 100 person-years; adjusted incidence rate ratio, 2.00 [95% CI, 1.72–2.32]). Patients with CAD alone (0.77 events per 100 person-years; adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.12–1.44]) or DM alone (0.95 events per 100 person-years; adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.42–2.15]) were at intermediate risk, whereas patients with neither DM nor CAD (0.52 events per 100 person-years) were at the lowest risk. Among patients with DM, extent of CAD was further predictive of risk ( P trend <0.001). Conclusions— Not only CAD but also DM are associated with the risk of ischemic stroke after coronary angiography. Their combination further increases the risk of ischemic stroke depending on the extent of CAD.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".