MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399671347 · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntae146

Polygenic and Socioeconomic Contributions to Nicotine Use and Cardiometabolic Health in Early Mid-Life

2024· article· en· W4399671347 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam M. Lippert, Daniel J. Corsi, Rockli Kim, Robbee Wedow, Jinho Kim, Beza Taddess, S. V. Subramanian

Bibliographic record

VenueNicotine & Tobacco Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
FundersEuropean Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWaistSocioeconomic statusBody mass indexDemographyMedicineExplained variationPopulationNicotineGerontologyHealth equityVariance (accounting)CircumferenceEnvironmental healthPublic healthStatisticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Early mid-life is marked by accumulating risks for cardiometabolic illness linked to health-risk behaviors like nicotine use. Identifying polygenic indices (PGI) has enriched scientific understanding of the cumulative genetic contributions to behavioral and cardiometabolic health, though few studies have assessed these associations alongside socioeconomic (SES) and lifestyle factors. AIMS AND METHODS: Drawing on data from 2337 individuals from the United States participating in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health, the current study assesses the fraction of variance in five related outcomes-use of conventional and electronic cigarettes, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, and glycosylated hemoglobin (A1c)-explained by PGI, SES, and lifestyle. RESULTS: Regression models on African ancestry (AA) and European ancestry (EA) subsamples reveal that the fraction of variance explained by PGI ranges across outcomes. While adjusting for sex and age, PGI explained 3.5%, 2.2%, and 0% in the AA subsample of variability in BMI, waist circumference, and A1c, respectively (in the EA subsample these figures were 7.7%, 9.4%, and 1.3%). The proportion of variance explained by PGI in nicotine-use outcomes is also variable. Results further indicate that PGI and SES are generally complementary, accounting for more variance in the outcomes when modeled together versus separately. CONCLUSIONS: PGI are gaining attention in population health surveillance, but polygenic variability might not align clearly with health differences in populations or surpass SES as a fundamental cause of health disparities. We discuss future steps in integrating PGI and SES to refine population health prediction rules. IMPLICATIONS: Study findings point to the complementary relationship of PGI and socioeconomic indicators in explaining population variance in nicotine outcomes and cardiometabolic wellness. Population health surveillance and prediction rules would benefit from the combination of information from both polygenic and socioeconomic risks. Additionally, the risk for electronic cigarette use among users of conventional cigarettes may have a genetic component tied to the cumulative genetic propensity for heavy smoking. Further research on PGI for vaping is needed.

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)0.004
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNicotine & Tobacco ResearchSame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207