DEPRESSION ASSOCIATED WITH INCIDENT TYPE I MI AMONG PEOPLE WITH HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Depression and anxiety have been associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) in the general population and among people with HIV (PWH) but with limited attention to MI type. We examined the association between depression and/or anxiety and incident Type 1 (T1MI) or Type 2 (T2MI) MI among PWH. Methods We examined data from seven NA-ACCORD clinical cohorts (1997-2019) with adjudicated first MI; outcomes included T1MI (plaque rupture or cardiac intervention) or T2MI (demand ischemia). We defined depression or anxiety as a time-varying ICD-9/10-coded diagnosis prior to incident MI. We censored participants at death, disengagement from care, or first MI (if not the outcome of interest). We used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate the association between depression or anxiety and MI by type, adjusting for demographics and risk factors for MI. Results Of the 32,358 study participants, 13,751 (42.5%) had a depression diagnosis, 9,132 (28.2%) had an anxiety diagnosis, and 15,970 (47.3%) never had diagnosed depression or anxiety. After adjusting for MI risk factors, depression was associated with T1MI (aHR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.00-1.48]) and anxiety had a protective association (albeit not statistically significant) with T1MI (aHR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.70-1.07]). Depression had a null association (aHR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.83-1.33] with T2MI, and anxiety was non-significantly associated with T2MI (aHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.89-1.51]). Conclusions Diagnosed depression was associated with T1MI but not T2MI, whereas anxiety was not statistically significantly associated with either MI type. Mental health diagnosis and treatment may play an important role in cardiovascular health among PWH.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".