MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117126826 · doi:10.14740/jem1583

Diabetes Drives Cardiovascular Risk in the Metabolic Triad: An Eight-Year Occupational Cohort Study of Ten Thousand Workers

2025· article· en· W7117126826 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lupita Ana Maria Valladolid-Sandoval, Jhosmer Ballena-Caicedo, Fiorella E. Zuzunaga-Montoya, Víctor Juan Vera-Ponce

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endocrinology and Metabolism · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusHazard ratioObesityIncidence (geometry)Cohort studyCohortProportional hazards modelRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cardiovascular diseases remain the leading cause of death and maintain a high burden in Latin America. Obesity, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes are independent risk factors, but their coexistence could amplify cardiovascular damage beyond their individual sum. The aim of our study was to determine, in a Peruvian occupational cohort followed for 8 years, how the coexistence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes is associated with the incidence of major cardiovascular events and to identify which combinations confer the highest risk. Methods: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of Peruvian workers without cardiovascular history, followed for 8 years. Obesity, hypertension, and diabetes were evaluated in eight mutually exclusive categories. The outcome was cardiovascular disease. Adjusted risk ratios were estimated using Cox regression, adjusted for age, sex, cholesterol, and triglycerides. Results: A progressive risk increase pattern was observed where the group without components had an incidence of 1.30 per 1,000 person-years, while the triad reached 34.94 per 1,000 person-years with adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 10.87 (2.81 - 42.06). Among isolated components, diabetes showed the highest risk (aHR = 4.24; 1.36 - 13.35) compared to obesity (1.45; 0.68 - 3.10) and hypertension (1.17; 0.32 - 4.24). In combinations, obesity + diabetes (aHR = 6.34; 1.73 - 23.27) and diabetes + hypertension (5.86; 1.47 - 23.39) concentrated the highest risks, above obesity + hypertension (2.01; 0.71 - 5.72). Conclusions: In the working population, the coexistence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes progressively increases CVD risk, with diabetes as the main axis and the triad identifying a very high-risk subgroup. These findings support periodic screening and intensive multifactorial management in the occupational setting, prioritizing those presenting diabetes alone or in combination.

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)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endocrinology and MetabolismSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207