Pulse Pressure Responses in Patients Treated with Valsartan and Hydrochlorothiazide Combination Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study of middle-aged and elderly patients, we examined the effects of treatment with the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan (Val) in combination with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) on pulse pressure (PP). After a 2-week washout period, patients entered a 4-week single-blind Val 160 mg once daily run-in period before randomization to one of three treatment groups: Val 160 mg (n = 666), Val 160 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg (n = 670) or Val 160 mg/HCTZ 25 mg (n = 666), once daily for eight weeks. Sitting PP at baseline was similar in all groups. From baseline to randomization, Val monotherapy reduced PP by 4.7 +/- 10.2 mmHg (mean +/- SD). At the end of the study, overall reductions in PP were 6.7 mmHg for Val 160/HCTZ 12.5 and 7.5 mmHg for Val 160/HCTZ 25. Val monotherapy reduced PP in mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients. Val combined with HCTZ provides an additional dose-related reduction in PP.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".