Higher postural heart rate increments on head-up tilt correlate with younger age but not orthostatic symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reports have shown that younger individuals present with higher postural heart rate increments on head-up tilt (HUT). However, a correlation between the degree of heart rate increment and symptoms of orthostatic intolerance has not been determined. The objective of this study was to determine whether higher postural heart rate increments during HUT correlate with symptoms of orthostatic intolerance in healthy subjects. Postural heart rate increment on HUT did not differ between men and women (P = 0.48) but did show a significant decrease by age group (P < 0.0001). There was a significant negative correlation between heart rate increment on HUT and age [r = -0.63 (-0.73, -0.51), r(2) = 0.400; P < 0.0001]. There was a significant difference with respect to symptoms of orthostatic intolerance by sex (P = 0.03) but not age (P = 0.58). There was no significant correlation between either symptoms of orthostatic intolerance and age [r = -0.13 (-0.31, 0.06), r(2) = 0.017; P = 0.17] or heart rate increment on HUT and symptoms of orthostatic intolerance [r = 0.15 (-0.04, 0.33), r(2) = 0.022; P = 0.13]. The results demonstrate that higher postural heart rate increments in younger individuals do not result in an increase in orthostatic intolerance. This highlights the potential need for a reevaluation of the diagnostic criteria for postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome in younger individuals.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".