MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386369981 · doi:10.1515/reveh-2023-0021

Exposure to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances and risk of stroke in adults: a meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4386369981 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews on Environmental Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsPerfluorooctanoic acidOdds ratioConfidence intervalMedicineMeta-analysisStroke (engine)Internal medicineEnvironmental chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Evidence of the adverse metabolic health effects of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) is increasing. However, the impact of PFAS on cardiovascular diseases remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the impact of PFAS on the stroke risk. CONTENT: Databases were searched for studies published up to November 1, 2022, which report the association between stroke and exposure to at least one of four main PFAS (perfluorooctanoic acid [PFOA], perfluorooctanesulfonic acid [PFOS], perfluorononanoic acid [PFNA], and perfluorohexane sulfonic acid [PFHxS]). Data extraction and quality assessment were performed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK: Four studies were included in this systematic review. Multivariate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for incident stroke per 1-log unit increment in each serum PFAS were combined in the meta-analysis. The risk of development of stroke was not significantly associated with PFOA, PFOS, or PFNA exposure (PFOA: pooled odds ratio [OR]=1.001, 95 % confidence interval [CI]=0.975-1.028, p=0.934; PFOS: pooled OR=0.994, 95 % CI=0.972-1.017, p=0.601; PFNA: pooled OR=1.016, 95 % CI=0.920-1.123, p=0.752), whereas a moderately lower risk was associated with PFHxS exposure without statistical significance (pooled OR=0.953, 95 % CI=0.908-1.001, p=0.054). PFOA, PFOS, and PFNA exposure showed a neutral association, while PFHxS showed a possible inverse association with the risk of stroke. Therefore, this finding should be interpreted with caution. Further prospective observational studies with PFAS mixture analyses are warranted.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.273 · 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