MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410303455 · doi:10.3390/jcm14103339

Cardiovascular Risk Assessment via Sleep Patterns and ECG-Based Biological Age Estimation

2025· article· en· W4410303455 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gouthamaan Manimaran, Sadasivan Puthusserypady, Helena Domínguez, Jakob E. Bardram

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityCase Western Reserve UniversityNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteUniversity of California, DavisUniversity of MinnesotaInnovationsfondenUniversity of WashingtonJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsMedicineSleep (system call)EstimationInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Understanding the intricate relationship between sleep quality and cardiovascular outcomes opens new avenues for risk stratification in cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). This study aims to evaluate the prognostic potential of biological age estimates derived from sleep-stage analysis and nocturnal heart rhythm patterns. Methods: Using polysomnographic data from 1149 patients, we extract ECG signals and use an unsupervised clustering approach to generate time-series clusters that capture dynamic fluctuations in heart rhythms. A subsequent deep learning model then estimated individual biological ages from these clusters, revealing associations between the predicted age, sleep patterns, and cardiac function. Results: In an independent test set of 736 patients, the predicted biological age was significantly associated with increased mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] 2.27, p < 0.05) and elevated CVD risk (HR 3.56, p < 0.001), while models based solely on nocturnal heart rhythms yielded HRs of 2.29 (p < 0.05) for all-cause mortality and 3.13 (p < 0.01) for CVD risk. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that integrating sleep stage and ECG offers a robust biomarker for cardiovascular risk stratification, paving the way for earlier interventions and more personalized healthcare strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.383 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207