MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181534998 · doi:10.20381/ruor-26202

Concordance and Discordance Between Non-High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Apolipoprotein B as Cardiovascular Disease Risk Markers over the Full Spectrum of Hypertriglyceridemia: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Lipid Clinic Data

2021· dissertation· en· W3181534998 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cathy Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipid metabolism and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsHypertriglyceridemiaConcordanceApolipoprotein BMedicineCross-sectional studyInternal medicineCholesterolHigh-density lipoproteinTriglyceridePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Lipid biomarkers are frequently used for prediction of cardiovascular disease risk. Triglycerides are routinely checked in blood work, and triglycerides are a key component of lipoproteins that contribute to atherogenic plaques, which cause cardiovascular disease. High triglycerides are a common condition in the general population. The relative effect of high triglycerides on the lipid biomarkers (non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B) for cardiovascular disease risk prediction is the focus of this thesis. Using cross-sectional lipid profile data from a large Lipid Clinic, we compared the correlation and concordance between non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B as cardiovascular disease risk markers among patients with mild, moderate, and severe hypertriglyceridemia. The findings showed that with higher triglycerides, there is lower agreement between the two biomarkers, which raises caution that they are not interchangeable, and further research is needed.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicLipid metabolism and disordersFrench-language works237,207