MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109431795 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20200007

Feasibility of identifying and describing the burden of early-onset metabolic syndrome in primary care electronic medical record data: a cross-sectional analysis

2020· article· en· W3109431795 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jamie Boisvenue, Carlo Oliva, Donna Manca, Jeffrey Johnson, Roseanne O. Yeung

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNovo NordiskSanofiAstraZeneca
KeywordsPrimary careCross-sectional studyMedicineElectronic medical recordMetabolic syndromeFamily medicineGerontologyPediatricsInternal medicinePathologyObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> The prevalence of metabolic syndrome is growing worldwide, yet remains underinvestigated in Canadian young adults. We sought to explore the use of a harmonized case definition specific to early-onset metabolic syndrome and determine its feasibility in assessing the prevalence of metabolic syndrome among electronic medical record (EMR) data of young adults in Northern Alberta. <h3>Methods:</h3> We conducted a cross-sectional study using a sample of EMR data from young adult patients aged 18–40 years and residing in Northern Alberta, who had an encounter with a participating primary care clinic between June 29, 2015, and June 29, 2018. Physical examination, laboratory investigation and disease diagnosis data were collected. A case definition and algorithm were developed to assess the feasibility of identifying metabolic syndrome, including measures for body mass index (BMI), blood pressure (BP), dysglycemia, hypertriglyceridemia, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, diabetes and hypertension. <h3>Results:</h3> Among 15 766 young adults, the case definition suggested the prevalence of metabolic syndrome was 4.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1%–4.7%. The most frequent 3-factor combination (41.6%, 95% CI 37.9%–45.3%) of metabolic syndrome criteria consisted of being overweight or obese, having elevated BP and hypertriglyceridemia. Half of metabolic syndrome cases (51.3%, 95% CI 47.6%–55.0%) were missing measures for fasting blood glucose, and one-fifth were missing a hemoglobin A<sub>1c</sub> (HbA<sub>1c</sub>) level. Notably, most young adults with a BMI of 25 or greater were missing HbA<sub>1c</sub> (68.7%, 95% CI 67.6%–69.8%), fasting blood glucose (84.0%, 95% CI 83.2%–84.8%) and triglyceride testing (79.0%, 95% CI 78.1%–79.9%). <h3>Interpretation:</h3> We have shown that our case definition is feasible in identifying early-onset metabolic syndrome using EMR data; however, the degree of missing data limits the feasibility in assessing prevalence. Further investigation is required to validate this case definition for metabolic syndrome in the EMR data, which may involve comparing this definition to other validated metabolic syndrome case definitions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207