MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388763099 · doi:10.1177/20451253231211574

Management of dyslipidaemia in individuals with severe mental illness: a population-based study in the Greater Copenhagen Area

2023· article· en· W4388763099 on OpenAlexaff
Grímur Høgnason Mohr, Carlo Alberto Barcella, Mia Klinten Grand, Margit Kriegbaum, Volkert Siersma, Margaret Hahn, Sri Mahavir Agarwal, Catrine Bakkedal, Lone Baandrup, Filip K. Knop, Christen Lykkegaard Andersen, Bjørn H. Ebdrup

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNovo Nordisk FondenSteno Diabetes Center Copenhagen
KeywordsMental illnessPsychiatryMedicinePopulationMental healthPsychologyGerontologyClinical psychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Severe mental illness (SMI) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. Dyslipidaemia is a potentially modifiable risk factor, which may be inadequately managed in patients with SMI. Objectives: To assess management of dyslipidaemia in patients with SMI versus healthy controls (HCs) in 2005 and 2015. Design and methods: Using Danish registers, we identified adult patients with SMI in the Greater Copenhagen Area (schizophrenia spectrum disorders or bipolar disorder) with ⩾1 general practitioner contact in the year before 2005 and 2015, respectively, and HCs without SMI matched on age and gender (1:5). Outcomes were lipid-profile measurements, presence of dyslipidaemia and redemption of lipid-lowering pharmacotherapy. Differences in outcomes between patients with SMI and controls were measured with multivariable logistic regression. Results: We identified 7217 patients with SMI in 2005 and 9939 in 2015. After 10 years, patients went from having lower odds of lipid measurements to having higher odds of lipid measurements compared with HCs [odds ratio (OR) 2005 0.70 (99% confidence interval (CI) 0.63–0.78) versus OR 2015 1.34 (99% CI 1.24–1.44); p 2005 versus2015 < 0.01]. Patients had higher odds of dyslipidaemia during both years [OR 2005 1.43 (99% CI 1.10–1.85) and OR 2015 1.23 (99% CI 1.08–1.41)]. Patients went from having lower odds of receiving lipid-lowering pharmacotherapy to having higher odds of receiving lipid-lowering pharmacotherapy [OR 2005 0.77 (99% CI 0.66–0.89) versus OR 2015 1.37 (99% CI 1.24–1.51); p 2005 versus2015 < 0.01]. However, among persons at high cardiovascular risk, patients had lower odds of receiving lipid-lowering pharmacotherapy during both years, including subsets with previous acute coronary syndrome [OR 2005 0.30 (99% CI 0.15–0.59) and OR 2015 0.44 (99% CI 0.24–0.83)] and ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) [OR 2005 0.43 (99% CI 0.26–0.69) and OR 2015 0.61 (99% CI 0.41–0.89)]. Conclusion: These results imply an increased general awareness of managing dyslipidaemia among patients with SMI in the primary prophylaxis of cardiovascular disease. However, secondary prevention with lipid-lowering drugs in patients with SMI at high cardiovascular risk may be lacking.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTherapeutic Advances in PsychopharmacologySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207