Associations between dimensions of the social environment and cardiometabolic health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The social environment (SE), that is, the social relationships and social context in which groups of people live and interact, is an understudied element of the broader living environment which impacts health. We aim to summarise the available evidence on the associations between SE and cardiometabolic disease (CMD) outcomes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection were searched from inception to 28 February 2024. Eligibility criteria We included studies for which determinants were SE factors such as area-level deprivation and social network characteristics and outcomes were type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases incidence and prevalence. Data extraction and synthesis Titles and abstracts and full text were screened in duplicate. Data appraisal and extraction were based on the study protocol published in PROSPERO. Methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We synthesised the data through vote counting and meta-analyses. Results From 10 143 records screened, 281 studies reporting 1108 relevant associations are included in this review. Of the 384 associations included in vote counting, 271 (71%) suggested that a worse SE is associated with a higher risk of CMD. 14 meta-analyses based on 180 associations indicated that worse SE was associated with increased odds of CMD outcomes, with 4 of them being statistically significant. For example, more economic and social disadvantage was associated with higher heart failure risk (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.61; n=18; I 2 =95%). With the exception of two meta-analyses for men, meta-analysed sex-specific associations consistently showed results in the same direction as the overall meta-analyses. Conclusion Worse SE seems to be associated with increased odds of CMD outcomes, although certain SE dimensions are underexplored in relation to CMD. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021223035.
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 | 0.023 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.025 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".