Sex Differences in the Association Between Subjective Social Status and Imaging Markers of Cardiac Inflammation and Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Beyond objective socioeconomic status (SES) indicators, subjective social status (SSS), an individual's subjective perception of their social standing relative to others, has been independently linked to cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Some studies also report sex differences in the association between SSS and CVD. This study aimed to investigate these potential sex differences using advanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging to detect subclinical CVD progression among healthy individuals. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 443 participants (mean age = 56.40, SD = 10.88; 52.14% females) free of CVD. All participants underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for quantitative assessment of T1 and T2 mapping, reflecting respectively diffuse fibrosis and edema, as part of inflammatory processes in the heart. SSS was measured using the MacArthur Subjective Social Status Scale. RESULTS: Female sex [b(SE) = 0.29 (0.10), p = .005], lower education [b(SE) = -0.23 (0.10), p = .026], and an interaction between sex and SSS [b(SE) = -0.15 (0.06), p = .019] were associated with higher T1 values, indicating a stronger association between lower SSS and cardiac fibrosis markers in females compared with males. No significant associations were found for T2 values. CONCLUSIONS: These findings extend the literature on the association of SSS with cardiovascular outcomes. Compared with males, females demonstrated a stronger association between lower SSS and an imaging marker of cardiac fibrosis among individuals free of CVD, further highlighting the relevance of sex-specific cardiovascular risk assessment.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".