Significant association between the endothelial lipase gene 584C/T polymorphism and coronary artery disease risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have investigated a potential association between the endothelial lipase gene (LIPG) 584C/T polymorphism and susceptibility to coronary artery disease (CAD), but a uniform conclusion is yet to be reached. To better evaluate the true relationship between the LIPG 584C/T polymorphism and the risk of CAD, a meta-analysis of 14 case-control studies with 9731 subjects was performed. Relevant articles published through August 2020 were searched in the CNKI, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases. Thirteen articles, including 14 eligible case-control studies with 4025 cases and 5706 controls, were enrolled in the present meta-analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scores of the case-control studies ranged from 6 to 8. The pooled results indicated that there is a significant association between the LIPG 584C/T polymorphism and CAD in the homozygote comparison model and the allelic comparison model. Subgroup analyses revealed that the LIPG 584C/T mutation significantly decreased the risk of CAD in the subgroups of African, CAD, hospital-based (HB), and polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) populations in some genetic models. No publication bias was found in our meta-analysis, which certifies the robustness of the current meta-analysis. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) also confirmed the stability of our results. The results of our meta-analysis indicate that the LIPG 584C/T polymorphism plays a protective role in the incidence of CAD. More high-quality case-control studies on various ethnicities are needed to confirm our results.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".