Bayesian network modelling study to identify factors influencing the risk of cardiovascular disease in Canadian adults with hepatitis C virus infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The present study evaluates the extent of association between hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and identifies factors mediating this relationship using Bayesian network (BN) analysis. Design and setting A population-based cross-sectional survey in Canada. Participants Adults from the Canadian Health Measures Survey (n=10 115) aged 30 to 74 years. Primary and secondary outcome measures The 10-year risk of CVD was determined using the Framingham Risk Score in HCV-positive and HCV-negative subjects. Using BN analysis, variables were modelled to calculate the probability of CVD risk in HCV infection. Results When the BN is compiled, and no variable has been instantiated, 73%, 17% and 11% of the subjects had low, moderate and high 10-year CVD risk, respectively. The conditional probability of high CVD risk increased to 13.9%±1.6% (p<2.2×10-16) when the HCV variable is instantiated to ‘Present’ state and decreased to 8.6%±0.2% when HCV was instantiated to ‘Absent’ (p<2.2×10-16). HCV cases had 1.6-fold higher prevalence of high-CVD risk compared with non-infected individuals (p=0.038). Analysis of the effect modification of the HCV-CVD relationship (using median Kullback-Leibler divergence; DKL) showed diabetes as a major effect modifier on the joint probability distribution of HCV infection and CVD risk (DKL=0.27, IQR: 0.26 to 0.27), followed by hypertension (0.24, IQR: 0.23 to 0.25), age (0.21, IQR: 0.10 to 0.38) and injection drug use (0.19, IQR: 0.06 to 0.59). Conclusions Exploring the relationship between HCV infection and CVD risk using BN modelling analysis revealed that the infection is associated with elevated CVD risk. A number of risk modifiers were identified to play a role in this relationship. Targeting these factors during the course of infection to reduce CVD risk should be studied further.
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 | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".