Persistence of the antihypertensive effect of low‐dose combination therapy in mild hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The persistence of the antihypertensive effect of perindopril 2 mg + indapamide 0.625 mg once daily for up to 72 h was evaluated using the "missed-dose" technique. After 4 weeks on perindopril 2 mg+indapamide 0.625 mg, 79 of 216 hypertensive patients at goal (diastolic blood pressure < 85 mmHg) continued on perindopril 2 mg+indapamide 0.625 mg for a further 8 weeks. During either week 9 or 11, placebo was substituted for perindopril 2 mg+indapamide 0.625 mg on either 1 day or on 2 consecutive days. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure was recorded at baseline, after 9 or 11 weeks of perindopril 2 mg+indapamide 0.625 mg and during the simulated missed doses, 24-48 and 48-72 h after perindopril 2 mg+indapamide 0.625 mg. Significant (p < 0.001) reductions in mean (+/- SD) 24-h blood pressure (mmHg) during the first 24 h after perindopril 2 mg+indapamide 0.625 mg vs baseline were noted for the two sub-groups subsequently allocated to one missed dose (-13.5 +/- 10.4/-8.0 +/- 6.6) or two missed doses (-12.2 +/- 7.4/-6.9 +/- 4.2). The antihypertensive effect persisted (p < 0.001 to p < 0.05 vs baseline) on the days when placebo was substituted for perindopril 2 mg+indapamide 0.625 mg with reductions in mean 24-h blood pressure from 24-48 h and 48-72 h after dosing being -11.6 +/- 9.6/-6.3 +/- 6.4 and -6.4 +/- 6.0/-3.9 +/- 4.2, respectively. Use of the "missed-dose" technique demonstrated persistence of an antihypertensive effect for perindopril 2 mg + indapamide 0.625 mg for up to 72 h after dosing.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".