MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PULSE WAVE VELOCITY BETWEEN HEART AND FEMORAL ARTERY BUT NOT CAROTID AUGMENTATION INDEX CORRELATES WITH LEFT VENTRICULAR MASS ONCE BLOOD PRESSURE HAS BEEN NORMALIZED: PP.31.250

2010· article· en· W1980306765 on OpenAlexaff
Simon W. Rabkin, Sum Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulse wave velocityCardiologyInternal medicineArterial stiffnessBlood pressureBody mass indexPulse pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Arterial stiffness can be assessed by Augmentation Index (AI) (difference between the first and second peaks of carotid pulse contour) or Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV). The objective of this study was to compare and determine whether AI measured from carotid pulse wave contour or PWV correlates with left ventricular mass in persons with hypertension on treatment with blood pressure less than 140/90 mmHg or in normotensive individuals. Methods: Patients without valvular heart disease had measurement of carotid pulse wave contour and pulse wave velocity in three different vascular segments. Left ventricular mass was calculated from the 2 D echocardiogram using ASE standards. Results: Twenty-nine persons age 63.8+2.4 yr (mean+SEM) with BP of 132+3/77+2 mmHg of whom 86.2% had hypertension on treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blockers (44.8%), diuretics (37.9%), beta blockers (31%) and/or calcium channel blockers (24.1%). Left ventricular mass adjusted for body surface area (LV mass index) was 87.8+15.5 g/m2 for men (18/29) and 87.3 + 15.5 g/m2 for women (11/29). There was a significant (p = 0.018) linear correlation (r = 0.497) between LV mass index and pulse wave velocity between heart and femoral artery. There was no significant relationship between LV mass and PWV in the heart to carotid artery or femoral artery to ankle arterial segments. There was absolutely no relationship between Augmentation index and LV mass (r = 0.0001, p = 0.93). Conclusion: In hypertensive patients whose blood pressures were less than 140/90 mmHg as well as normotensive subjects, arterial stiffness as assessed by pulse wave velocity in the heart to femoral segment is an indicator of left ventricular mass. In contrast Augmentation Index determined from carotid pulse contour was of no value as an indicator of LV mass.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207