MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181133540 · doi:10.2147/rmhp.s301049

Geographic and Sociodemographic Disparities in Cardiovascular Risk in Burkina Faso: Findings from a Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey

2021· article· en· W3181133540 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kadari Cissé, Sékou Samadoulougou, Mady Ouédraogo, Bruno Bonnechère, Jean‐Marie Degryse, Séni Kouanda, Fati Kirakoya‐Samadoulougou

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Management and Healthcare Policy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsMedicineFramingham Risk ScorePoisson regressionDemographyCross-sectional studyAbsolute risk reductionRisk assessmentEnvironmental healthDiseaseInternal medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment is a critical step in the current approach to the primary prevention of CVD, particularly in low-income countries such as Burkina Faso. In this study, we aimed to assess the geographic and sociodemographic disparities of the ten-year cardiovascular risk in Burkina Faso. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the data from the first nationwide survey using the World Health Organization (WHO) STEPwise approach. Ten-year cardiovascular risk was determined using the WHO 2019 updated risk chart (WHO risk) as main outcome, and the Framingham risk score (FRS) and the Globorisk chart for secondary outcomes. We performed a modified Poisson regression model using a generalized estimating equation to examine the association between CVD risk and sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 3081 participants aged 30 to 64 years were included in this analysis. The overall age and sex-standardized mean of absolute ten-year cardiovascular risk assessed using the WHO risk chart was 2.5% (95% CI: 2.4-2.6), ranging from 2.3% (95% CI: 2.2-2.4) in Centre Est to 3.0% (95% CI: 2.8-3.2) in the Centre region. It was 4.6% (95% CI: 4.4-4.8) for FRS and 4.0% (95% CI: 3.8-4.1) for Globorisk. Regarding categorized CVD risk (absolute risk ≥10%), we found out that the age and sex-standardized prevalence of elevated risk was 1.7% (95% CI: 1.3-2.1) for WHO risk, 10.4% (95% CI: 9.6-11.2) for FRS, and 5.9% (95% CI: 5.1-6.6) for Globorisk. For all of the three risk scores, elevated CVD risk was associated with increasing age, men, higher education, urban residence, and health region (Centre). CONCLUSION: We found sociodemographic and geographic inequalities in the ten-year CVD risk in Burkina Faso regardless of risk score used. Therefore, population-wide interventions are needed to improve detection and management of adult in the higher CVD risk groups in Burkina Faso.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk Management and Healthcare PolicySame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207