MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416530652 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.20.25340708

Clustering of Social Determinants of Health and their Association with Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation

2025· preprint· W4416530652 on OpenAlexafffund
Yusheng Zhou, Jonathan Houle, Valeria Raparelli, Colleen M. Norris, Louise Pilote

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Latent class modelCluster (spacecraft)BiobankAtrial fibrillationSocial determinants of healthSocial vulnerabilityAssociation (psychology)Causality (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Despite improvements in diagnostic and therapeutic options, individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) remain at high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Social determinants of health (SDOH) are strongly associated with cardiovascular outcomes, yet the complex patterns through which these factors cluster to create distinct vulnerability profiles remain poorly understood. Methods We conducted a latent class analysis utilizing data from the UK Biobank cohort, examining 15 SDOH indicators across economic, psychological, and neighborhood domains among 3,842 participants with AF (35.1% female). Multi-group latent class analysis (LCA) evaluated differences in vulnerability pattern distribution, and explored whether SDOH clusters of vulnerability varies by sex. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between identified SDOH clusters and composite cardiovascular outcomes comprising major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all-cause mortality. Results We identified five distinct SDOH vulnerability clusters based on multi-group LCA: 1) low vulnerability across all domains; 2) primarily economic vulnerability; 3) primarily neighborhood-related vulnerability; 4) economic and neighborhood vulnerability with favorable psychological conditions; and 5) high vulnerability across all domains. Male participants demonstrated a higher representation in more advantaged profiles than their female counterpart (Cluster 1: 37.0% vs. 26.6%; Cluster 4: 25.3% vs. 14.1%). Female participants exhibited the greater representation in the overall highest vulnerability cluster(Cluster 5: 35.1% vs. 25.2%) as compared with male participants. Compared to Cluster 1, individuals with AF from classes with adverse economic conditions (Cluster 2, 4 and 5) had a higher risk of MACE events with individuals in Cluster 5 having twice the risk. No sex interactions were observed with SDOH clusters in their association with MACE. Conclusions We identified five distinct SDOH vulnerability patterns among individuals with AF, revealing economic determinants as pivotal drivers of cardiovascular risk. These findings provide an evidence-based framework for implementing precision medicine approaches that incorporate comprehensive SDOH assessment into AF clinical management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→