Sex-specific lifetime risk of cardiovascular events: the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer-Norfolk prospective population cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Better understanding of sex differences in cardiovascular disease (CVD) is essential in tailoring appropriate preventative strategies. Using a large population-based study with follow-up >25 years, we aimed to determine sex-specific lifetime risks of incident CVD and cardiovascular (CV) mortality amongst populations with and without prevalent CVD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants were drawn from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer-Norfolk and followed up for a median of 26.2 years. Sex-specific lifetime risks were ascertained accounting for the competing risk of death. Models were adjusted for ethnicity and time-updated covariates: material deprivation, CV risk factors, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, and medication. A total of 23 859 participants [54.5% women; mean age (standard deviation) 59.2 (9.3) years at baseline] were included. Adjusted lifetime risks of incident CVD were higher in men than in women (69.1 vs. 57.7% at age 75): cause-specific hazard ratio (cHR) (99% confidence interval)-1.49 (1.41-1.57), while the risks of CV mortality at age 75 were 4.4% (men) and 3.1% (women): cHR-1.42 (1.31-1.54). Myocardial infarction was the predominant first presentation in men until the eighth decade. In women, the first CVD manifestations after their sixth decade were predominantly atrial fibrillation and stroke. The male-associated excess relative risks of incident CVD and CV mortality were halved in people with prevalent CVD. CONCLUSION: We characterized the sex-specific lifetime CV risks in a large cohort. Men had substantially higher risk of incident CVD and CV mortality than women, which was attenuated amongst people with prevalent CVD. Our findings provide an evidence base for sex-specific CV prevention.
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 | 0.015 | 0.001 |
| 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".