MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093978552 · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2020.585268

Association Between GJA1 rs13216675 T>C Polymorphism and Risk of Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020· review· en· W3093978552 on OpenAlexaff
Xuejiao Chen, Guowei Li, Junguo Zhang, Xin Huang, Zebing Ye, Yahong Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster University
FundersGuangdong Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsMeta-analysisOdds ratioInternal medicineGenetic modelConfidence intervalMedicineAtrial fibrillationSubgroup analysisSingle-nucleotide polymorphismPublication biasSNPPolymorphism (computer science)GastroenterologyBioinformaticsAlleleGenotypeGeneticsGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Rs13216675 T>C polymorphism, a SNP (single-nucleotide polymorphism) close to Gap Junction Protein Alpha 1 (GJA1) gene, has been reported to be associated with risk of atrial fibrillation (AF); however, the results remained inconclusive. We aimed to perform a systematic review to clarify the relationship between rs13216675 and risk of AF. Materials and methods: We systematically searched the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure up to July 15, 2020. Data were synthesized using the random-effects model. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the relationship between rs13216675 and risk of AF. Results: Seven studies involving 39,827 cases and 458,466 controls were analyzed in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled OR of rs13216675 polymorphism for AF was significant (OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.07-1.12, P < 0.001) under the additive genetic model. Subgroup analyses revealed that rs13216675 polymorphism was significantly associated with AF in both Asians (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.07-1.17, P < 0.001) and Europeans (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.06-1.12, P < 0.001). When data were stratified by control sources, rs13216675 polymorphism was significantly related to AF in studies with both population-based controls (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.07-1.12) and hospital-based controls (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.07-1.17). No evidence of publication bias was detected. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis suggested that rs13216675 was significantly related to risk of AF and therefore might serve as a potential biological marker of AF.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.025
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207