MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205925090 · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.08.020

Prevalence and Prognostic Implications of Diabetes With Cardiomyopathy in Community-Dwelling Adults

2021· review· en· W3205925090 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew W. Segar, Muhammad Shahzeb Khan, Kershaw V. Patel, Javed Butler, W.H. Wilson Tang, Muthiah Vaduganathan, Carolyn S.P. Lam, Subodh Verma, Darren K. McGuire, Ambarish Pandey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Cardiology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyDiabetes mellitusCohortOverweightHeart failureIncidence (geometry)Body mass indexEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with abnormalities in cardiac remodeling and high risk of heart failure (HF). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and prognostic implications of diabetes with cardiomyopathy (DbCM) among community-dwelling individuals. METHODS: Adults without prevalent cardiovascular disease or HF were pooled from 3 cohort studies (ARIC [Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities], CHS [Cardiovascular Health Study], CRIC [Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort]). Among participants with diabetes, DbCM was defined using different definitions: 1) least restrictive: ≥1 echocardiographic abnormality (left atrial enlargement, left ventricle hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction); 2) intermediate restrictive: ≥2 echocardiographic abnormalities; and 3) most restrictive: elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels (>125 in normal/overweight or >100 pg/mL in obese) plus ≥2 echocardiographic abnormalities. Adjusted Fine-Gray models were used to evaluate the risk of HF. RESULTS: Among individuals with diabetes (2,900 of 10,208 included), the prevalence of DbCM ranged from 67.0% to 11.7% in the least and most restrictive criteria, respectively. Higher fasting glucose, body mass index, and age as well as worse kidney function were associated with higher risk of DbCM. The 5-year incidence of HF among participants with DbCM ranged from 8.4%-12.8% in the least and most restrictive definitions, respectively. Compared with euglycemia, DbCM was significantly associated with higher risk of incident HF with the highest risk observed for the most restrictive definition of DbCM (HR: 2.55 [95% CI: 1.69-3.86]; least restrictive criteria HR: 1.99 [95% CI: 1.50-2.65]). A similar pattern of results was observed across cohort studies, across sex and race subgroups, and among participants without hypertension or obesity. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of the criteria used to define cardiomyopathy, DbCM identifies a high-risk subgroup for developing HF.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations92
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of CardiologySame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207