Dietary intake and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with chronic vascular disease: insights from the COMPASS trial cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major adverse limb events (MALE). There are limited data regarding dietary patterns and the risk of recurrent MACE and MALE in CAD and PAD patients. We aimed to identify dietary patterns associated with MACE and MALE in patients with CAD and/or PAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed data collected from patients enrolled into the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial, in which diet was assessed by a short food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) at baseline. Two dietary pattern scores, the modified Alternate Healthy Eating Index (mAHEI) and Mediterranean Diet Score (mMDS), were calculated. We tested the association between mAHEI and mMDS and the incidence of MACE and/or MALE. The mean mAHEI score was 23.0 ± 7.7 (out of 70) overall and was similar comparing CAD and PAD patients. The incidence of MACE or MALE was 6.3% in the lowest diet quality quartile (as assessed by mAHEI) compared with 4.2% in the highest quartile over 30 months. In the fully adjusted model, the hazard ratio of a low diet quality (Quartile 1) compared with the highest (Quartile 4) for MACE or MALE was 1.27 (95% CI: 1.08-1.49; P = 0.004, Q1 vs. Q4). This excess hazard was primarily driven by higher MACE in both the CAD and PAD cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Poor diet quality as assessed by the mAHEI is independently associated with a higher risk of recurrent MACE and MALE in patients with chronic CAD and/or PAD.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".