Racial Disparities in Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes After a Myocardial Infarction in Young or Middle‐Aged Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Black patients tend to develop coronary artery disease at a younger age than other groups. Previous data on racial disparities in outcomes of myocardial infarction (MI) have been inconsistent and limited to older populations. Our objective was to investigate racial differences in the outcome of MI among young and middle-aged patients and the role played by socioeconomic, psychosocial, and clinical differences. Methods and Results We studied 313 participants (65% non-Hispanic Black) <61 years old hospitalized for confirmed type 1 MI at Emory-affiliated hospitals and followed them for 5 years. We used Cox proportional-hazard models to estimate the association of race with a composite end point of recurrent MI, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular death after adjusting for demographic, socioeceonomic status, psychological, and clinical risk factors. The mean age was 50 years, and 50% were women. Compared with non-Black patients, Black patients had lower socioeconomic status and more clinical and psychosocial risk factors but less angiographic coronary artery disease. The 5-year incidence of cardiovascular events was higher in Black (35%) compared to non-Black patients (19%): hazard ratio (HR) 2.1, 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.6. Adjustment for socioeconomic status weakened the association (HR 1.3, 95% CI, 0.8-2.4) more than adjustment for clinical and psychological risk factors. A lower income explained 46% of the race-related disparity in outcome. Conclusions Among young and middle-aged adult survivors of an MI, Black patients have a 2-fold higher risk of adverse outcomes, which is largely driven by upstream socioeconomic factors rather than downstream psychological and clinical risk factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".