Skin autofluorescence and cause-specific mortality in a population-based cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aimed to assess the association of SAF with cardiovascular mortality in the general population and the possible association between SAF with other disease-specific mortality rates. We evaluated 77,143 participants without known diabetes or cardiovascular disease. The cause of death was ascertained by the municipality database. The associations between SAF and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and cancer mortality were assessed with Cox proportional hazard analysis.After a median follow-up of 115 months, 1447 participants were deceased (1.9%). SAF and age-adjusted SAF-z score were higher in all mortality groups. Cox regression analysis revealed that the highest quartile of SAF was associated with increased odds of cardiovascular mortality, (HR) 12.6 (7.3-21.7) and after adjusting for age (HR 1.8 (1.0-3.2)). Significance was lost after additional adjustments for sex, smoking status, and BMI (HR 1.4 (0.8-2.5). For cancer-related mortality the highest quartile of SAF was associated with higher probability of mortality in all models (unadjusted HR 8.6 (6.6-11.3), adjusted for age HR 2.1 (1.6-2.8)), adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and BMI HR 1.7 (1.3-2.4)). SAF is associated with all-cause mortality as well as cardiovascular and cancer-related mortality 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".