A Comparative Analysis of Cardiovascular Risk in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Seropositive and -Seronegative Pre-Menopausal Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has been associated with an increased risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) in women. HIV-positive pre-menopausal women lose the cardio-protective effect of estrogen and are at a higher risk for developing CAD. Our study intended to assess the cardiovascular risk in HIV-positive pre-menopausal women. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) datasets. The 10-year Framingham risk score for developing CAD was calculated for HIV-positive and HIV-negative women. The individual risk factors contributing to CAD were compared. The populations' intent to reduce their risk and their doctor's advice to reduce the risk were analyzed. A P-value < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Out of the available sample of 82,091 people, 9,635 women (11.7%) met the inclusion criteria of the study. Among them, 25 women were HIV-seropositive (0.25%). Though there was no significant difference in blood pressure, hemoglobin A1c, C-reactive protein, high-density lipoprotein or total cholesterol (P > 0.05), the mean Framingham risk score in pre-menopausal HIV-positive women (mean (M) = 2.12, standard deviation (SD) = 2.73) was significantly higher than the HIV-negative women (M = 0.95, SD = 1.94) (P < 0.01). Neither did majority of the HIV-positive women intend to decrease their cardiovascular risk nor did their healthcare providers advise them to do so. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of developing CAD in pre-menopausal women is higher from traditional risk factors itself. While HIV is now proven to be an independent risk factor for developing CAD in women, focus should be on reducing the risk from traditional methods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".