A cardiovascular disease risk factor in children with congenital heart disease: unmasking elevated waist circumference - a CHAMPS* study *CHAMPS: Children’s Healthy-Heart Activity Monitoring Program in Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with congenital heart disease (CHD) have an elevated risk of future cardiovascular disease but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. Abdominal obesity (measured as waist circumference) is a risk factor for adult onset of cardiovascular diseases and is correlated with low physical activity levels, commonly found in children with congenital heart disease. Elevated waist circumference may be a mechanism by which cardiovascular disease risk is elevated in children with CHD. The purpose of this study was to compare waist circumference between children with and without CHD, while considering potential confounders. We hypothesized that children with CHD would have higher measures of waist circumference when controlling for differences in birthweight, lean mass, and physical activity. METHODS: Thirty-two children with CHD (10.9 ± 2.6 years; 12 female) from the Children's Healthy-Heart Activity Monitoring Program in Saskatchewan, and 23 healthy controls (11.7 ± 2.5 years; 10 female) were studied. Waist circumference, physical activity (physical activity questionnaire), body composition (lean mass; dual x-ray absorptiometry), and birthweight were assessed. Analysis of covariance, Mann-Whitney U, and independent sample t-tests were used to assess group differences (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Children with CHD had greater waist circumference than controls, controlling for lean mass, physical activity, birthweight, and sex (F (1, 49) = 4.488, p = 0.039). Physical activity, lean mass, and birthweight were not significantly different between groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings generate a novel hypothesis-higher waist circumferences in children with CHD compared to age-matched controls, may contribute to an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".