Cardiovascular risk factors are negatively associated with rheumatoid arthritis disease outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD), but the influence of CVD risk factors on RA outcomes is limited. We examined if CVD risk factors alone are associated with RA disease activity and disability. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of participants in the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative, RA registry. Patients were categorized into mutually exclusive CVD categories: (1) No established CVD and no CVD risk factors; (2) CVD risk factors only including ⩾1 of hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, or smoking; or (3) history of established CVD event. Multivariable regression analyses examined the effect of CVD status on Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28-ESR), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), and Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores at baseline. Results: Of 2033 patients, 50% had at least 1 CVD risk factor, even in the absence of established CVD. The presence of ⩾1 CVD risk factor was independently associated with higher CDAI [β coefficient 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29–2.90, p = 0.02], DAS28-ESR (β coefficient 0.20, 95% CI 0.06–0.34, p = 0.01) and HAQ-DI scores (β coefficient 0.15, 95% CI 0.08–0.22, p < 0.0001). The total number of CVD risk factors displayed a dose response, as >1 CVD risk factor was associated with higher disease activity and disability, compared with having one or no CVD risk factors. Conclusion: CVD risk factors alone, or in combination, are associated with higher disease activity and disability in RA. This emphasizes the importance of risk factor recognition and management, not only to prevent CVD, but also to improve potential RA outcomes.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".