Epicardial Adipose Tissue and Psoriasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: As a novel biomarker for cardiovascular diseases, epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) has been linked to psoriasis. We conducted an updated systematic review, building upon a previous report on the relationship between EAT and psoriasis. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. The pooled mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and the corresponding confidence interval (CIs) were calculated. Results: We included 10 studies with 1287 participants. Five of the included studies were of high methodological quality, while the other five were of moderate quality. The pooled data indicated that psoriasis patients had significantly increased EAT compared to individuals in the control group (SMD 1.53, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.45, 9 studies, 1195 participants). The subgroup analysis showed that psoriasis patients had significantly increased EAT thickness compared with the controls (SMD 2.45, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.17, 5 studies, 657 participants). Similarly, EAT area in single-slice CT images was significantly higher in the psoriasis group than in the control group (SMD 0.45, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.76, 2 studies, 195 participants). The EAT volume based on CT images appeared to be higher in the psoriasis group than in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (SMD 0.32, 95% CI −0.06 to 0.70, 2 studies, 343 participants). Conclusions: EAT, especially echocardiographic EAT thickness and CT-determined EAT area, was significantly associated with psoriasis, but CT-determined EAT volume was not.
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.036 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".