High parathyroid hormone, but not low vitamin D concentrations, expose elderly inpatients to hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) and 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) concentrations might contribute to blood pressure (BP) levels. Mixed results in previous literature could be due to the failure to consider both these hormones concurrently, despite their long-known relationship. Our objective was to examine the association of serum intact PTH and 25OHD concentrations with BP levels amongst older inpatients, while accounting for each other. METHODS: The participants were 284 Caucasian older inpatients with no suspicion of primary hyperparathyroidism (mean age 85.87 ± 5.90 years; 65.8% female) admitted to the geriatric acute care unit of Angers University Hospital, France. They were divided into two groups according to the existence of hypertension (i.e. systolic blood pressure [SBP] >140 mmHg, or diastolic blood pressure [DBP] >90 mmHg). Age, sex, numbers of chronic diseases and of drugs taken daily, use of antihypertensive or corticosteroid drugs and of calcium supplements/vitamin D, thyroid-stimulating hormone and albumin concentrations, creatinine clearance, and season tested were used as covariables. RESULTS: Hypertensive participants (n=106) had higher intact PTH concentrations than normotensive patients (P=0.044). There was a positive linear association of BP with intact PTH concentrations (adjusted β=0.08, P=0.015 for SBP; adjusted β=0.05, P=0.044 for DBP), but not with vitamin D. Serum intact PTH concentration, unlike 25OHD, was associated with hypertension (adjusted OR 1.01, P=0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of 25OHD, PTH was associated with hypertension by increasing both SBP and DBP.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".