Early Occurrence of Metabolic Syndrome After Hypertension in Pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the cardiovascular risk profile and the prevalence of metabolic syndrome among women with a history of pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH). METHODS: From a cohort of 3,799 nulliparous women prospectively recruited between 1989 and 1997, we performed an observational study on 168 case-control pairs 7.8 years after delivery. Participants were scheduled for a visit with a research nurse to evaluate their cardiovascular risk profile using a questionnaire, anthropometric measurements and blood specimen analysis. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight women with prior PIH (105 with gestational hypertension and 63 with preeclampsia) and 168 controls matched for age and year of index delivery were evaluated. The women with PIH (34.6 +/- 4.4 years) were more obese and had higher systolic (115 mm Hg versus 108 mm Hg) and diastolic (75 mm Hg versus 70 mm Hg) blood pressures (P < .001) than the 168 controls (35.1 +/- 4.5 years). They had lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level (1.30 mmol/L versus 1.42 mmol/L; P < .001), increased fasting blood glucose concentration (5.2 mmol/L versus 5.0 mmol/L; P = .002), and higher insulin levels (119 versus 91 pmol/L; P < .001). The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome was higher in the PIH group (unadjusted odds ratio = 4.9; 95% confidence interval 2.1-10.9) compared with controls, even after adjustment for confounders (adjusted odds ratio = 3.6; 95% confidence interval 1.4 -9.0). CONCLUSION: In white women in their mid-30s, the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome is 3- to 5-fold increased in those with a history of PIH in their first pregnancy. This emphasizes the importance of long-term follow-up assessment for cardiovascular risk factors in these women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".