Relationship Between Self-Reported Sleep Duration and Changes in Circadian Blood Pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Abnormalities in sleep duration and circadian blood pressure (BP) rhythm are both independently associated with increased risk of death and cardiovascular disease. The relationship, however, between these two entities remains unclear. This study was undertaken to determine whether abnormal sleep duration is associated with nondipping status and elevated morning surge. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, we assessed the relationship between self-reported sleep duration and circadian BP profiles from 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) in 108 normotensive and 417 hypertensive subjects, independent of relevant sociodemographic, anthropometric, and medical factors. RESULTS: On average, subjects reported sleeping 6.5 +/- 1.7 h with 18.5% sleeping < or =5 h and 7.6%, > or =9 h. There were 199 (37.9%) nondippers in our cohort and the mean morning surge was 18.7 +/- 1.7 mm Hg. The adjusted odds ratio for nondipping (<10% nocturnal systolic BP fall) associated with a 1-h decrement in sleep duration was 1.12 (P = 0.04) and with age per 5-year increment, 1.15 (P = 0.0003). The adjusted odds ratio for an elevated morning surge (> or =18.0 mm Hg) associated with a 1-h increment in sleep duration was 1.13 (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that a sleep deficit is associated with nondipping and a decreased morning surge, whereas a sleep surfeit is associated with less nondipping and an increased morning surge. These findings provide a possible link for the heightened risk of cardiovascular disease associated with disturbances in circadian BP rhythm and the extremes of sleep quantity.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".