MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 15536: Impact of Social Determinants of Health on Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases Incidence

2023· article· en· W4389958770 on OpenAlexaff
Audrey Paulin, Hasanga D. Manikpurage, Sébastien Thériault, Benoît J. Arsenault

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialSocioeconomic statusHazard ratioSocial supportInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionGerontologyDemographyConfidence intervalEnvironmental healthPopulationPsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with an unfavorable socioeconomic status have a higher risk of developing chronic diseases such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, the shared contribution of socioeconomic status, psychosocial factors and living environment on ASCVD risk remains unknown. We investigated the contribution of these social determinants of health on the incidence of ASCVD. METHODS: We developed a polysocial risk score (PsRS) using latent class analysis based on socioeconomic factors (household income, level/quality of education and employment status), psychosocial factors (living alone, social support, social activities, social isolation, emotional distress, and diagnosis of psychiatric disorders), and living environment (social deprivation score, crime rate, housing quality, housing stability, proximity to green/blue spaces and proximity to nature). The study sample included 319 842 participants of the UK Biobank, free of ASCVD recruited between 2006 and 2010. As of August 2021, 23 840 of them had incident ASCVD (fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or cardiac revascularization procedures). Participants were divided into three groups based on latent class analysis adjusted for age. The impact of the PsRS on incident ASCVD was assessed using Cox proportional hazards for all participants, women and men adjusted for age, sex, and ethnicity. RESULTS: Compared to participants with a low PsRS, those with an intermediate score had a slightly higher risk of ASCVD (hazard ratio [HR]=1.05 [95% CI, 1.01-1.09], p=0.024) while those with a high PsRS had a higher risk of ASCVD (HR=1.46 [95% CI, 1.40-1.52], p<0.001). The effect of the PsRS on ASCVD incidence appeared to be more pronounced in women (HR=1,59 [95% CI, 1.48-1.71], p<0.001 and HR=1.39 [95% IC, 1.32-1.46], p<0.001, respectively, for women and men with a high PsRS compared to individuals with a low PsRS within the same sex). CONCLUSION: A PsRS based on the living environment as well as socioeconomic and psychosocial factors was associated with incident ASCVD in participants of the UK Biobank. Multifactor approaches targeting both social determinants of health and traditional risk factors could reduce the burden of ASCVD in the general population.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→