MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389574675 · doi:10.7326/m23-1345

Development and Validation of the CANHEART Population-Based Laboratory Prediction Models for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

2023· article· en· W4389574675 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maneesh Sud, Atul Sivaswamy, Peter C. Austin, Todd J. Anderson, David Naimark, Michael E. Farkouh, Douglas S. Lee, Idan Roifman, George Thanassoulis, Karen Tu, Jacob A. Udell, Harindra C. Wijeysundera, Dennis T. Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaTed Rogers Centre for Heart ResearchUniversity of CalgaryHealth Sciences CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoNorth York General HospitalMcGill University Health CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineCohortPopulationMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineFramingham Risk ScoreMean corpuscular volumeCohort studyDiseaseHematocrit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prediction of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in primary prevention assessments exclusively with laboratory results may facilitate automated risk reporting and improve uptake of preventive therapies. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate sex-specific prediction models for ASCVD using age and routine laboratory tests and compare their performance with that of the pooled cohort equations (PCEs). DESIGN: Derivation and validation of the CANHEART (Cardiovascular Health in Ambulatory Care Research Team) Lab Models. SETTING: Population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A derivation and internal validation cohort of adults aged 40 to 75 years without cardiovascular disease from April 2009 to December 2015; an external validation cohort of primary care patients from January 2010 to December 2014. MEASUREMENTS: Age and laboratory predictors measured in the outpatient setting included serum total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, hemoglobin, mean corpuscular volume, platelets, leukocytes, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and glucose. The ASCVD outcomes were defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, and death from ischemic heart or cerebrovascular disease within 5 years. RESULTS: Sex-specific models were developed and internally validated in 2 160 497 women and 1 833 147 men. They were well calibrated, with relative differences less than 1% between mean predicted and observed risk for both sexes. The c-statistic was 0.77 in women and 0.71 in men. External validation in 31 697 primary care patients showed a relative difference less than 14% and an absolute difference less than 0.3 percentage points in mean predicted and observed risks for both sexes. The c-statistics for the laboratory models were 0.72 for both sexes and were not statistically significantly different from those for the PCEs in women (change in c-statistic, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.01]) or men (change in c-statistic, -0.01 [CI, -0.04 to 0.02]). LIMITATION: Medication use was not available at the population level. CONCLUSION: The CANHEART Lab Models predict ASCVD with similar accuracy to more complex models, such as the PCEs. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal Medicine→Same topicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research→French-language works237,207→