All-cause and cardiovascular mortality in dual sensory impairment patients: A meta-analysis of cohort studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This meta-analysis is to determine the risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality of dual sensory impairment (DSI). Methods: Relevant cohort studies were searched in Medline with PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases. The quality of the included studies was assessed based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). STATA software (USA) was used to conduct statistical analyses. To determine the source of heterogeneity, subgroup and sensitivity analyses were carried out. Funnel plots and the Egger's test were used for detecting publication bias. Results: = 0%, P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses on sex and territory type revealed that DSI were all associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality. Conclusions: This study shows that DSI is linked to higher risks of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, suggesting that DSI should be regarded as an independent mortality risk factor. Physicians treating individuals with DSI should assess its impact on life expectancy. Registration: The protocol was previously registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) platform (CRD42024527256).
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".