Nighttime Blood Pressure in Normotensive Subjects With Chronic Insomnia: Implications for Cardiovascular Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess as whether insomniacs have higher nighttime blood pressure (BP) and a blunted day-to-night BP reduction, recognized markers of increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. DESIGN: Prospective case-control study. SETTING: University hospital-based sleep research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen normotensive subjects with chronic primary insomnia (9 women, 42 +/- 7 y) and 13 sex- and age-matched good sleepers. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Subjects underwent 2-week sleep diary and 3 sleep studies to provide subjective and objective sleep variables, and 24-h beat-to-beat BP recording to provide daytime, night-time and day-to-night BP changes ([nighttime-daytime]/daytime)*100) (BP dipping). Spectral analysis of the electroencephalogram (EEG) was also performed during sleep of night 3 to assess EEG activity in the beta frequency (16-32 Hz), a measure of brain cortical activation. Nighttime SBP was higher (111 +/- 15 vs 102 +/- 12 mm Hg, P < 0.01) and day-to-night SBP dipping was lower (-8% +/- 6% vs -15% +/- 5%, P < 0.01) in insomniacs than good sleepers. Insomniacs also had higher activity in EEG beta frequency (P < 0.05). Higher nighttime SBP and smaller SBP dipping were independently associated with increased EEG beta activity (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Higher nighttime SBP and blunted day-to-night SBP dipping are present in normotensive subjects with chronic insomnia and are associated with a hyperactivity of the central nervous system during sleep. An altered BP profile in insomniacs could be one mechanism implicated in the link between insomnia and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality documented in epidemiological studies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".