Severity of psychological distress over five years differs as a function of sex and presence of coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Psychological distress is more prevalent and severe among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) compared to healthy individuals. Little is known regarding its time course, and whether these differences extend to individuals with non-cardiovascular (CV) illnesses. This study examined the presence, severity, and time course of psychological distress in men and women with CAD and those of similarly aged individuals suffering from non-CV conditions.Methods 1229 individuals (61% men; meanage = 60.4 ± 7.0 years) with stable CAD or non-CV illnesses reported on social support, hostility, stress, anxiety and depression at baseline as well as 4.8 ± 0.8 years later. Analyses involved mixed (Sex*CAD status*Time) repeated measures analyses (controlling for relevant covariates), as well as Chi-square and McNemar analyses.Results Women with CAD reported more symptoms of depression compared to other participants at both evaluations (p’s < 0.01), and reported more symptoms of anxiety and stress compared to others at T1 (p’s < 0.05). At T2, perceived stress remained significantly greater among women with CAD compared to men (p’s < 0.01), though differences in anxiety were no longer significant. Men reported more hostility than women (p = 0.001). CAD women fell within the clinical range for depression (p < 0.001), anxiety (p = 0.001), and stress (p = 0.030) more frequently compared to others at T1, and for depression (p = 0.009) and stress (p = 0.002) at T2.Conclusions The evolution of patient distress differed as a function of the measure examined, their sex, and/or CV status. While psychological distress was prevalent among these patients with diverse health conditions, women with CAD were particularly and chronically vulnerable.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".