Anxiety and Hostility Are Associated With Reduced Baroreflex Sensitivity and Increased Beat-to-Beat Blood Pressure Variability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether psychological factors are associated with heart rate variability (HRV), blood pressure variability (BPV), and baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) among healthy middle-aged men and women. METHODS: A population-based sample of 71 men and 79 women (35-64 years of age) was studied. Five-minute supine recordings of ECG and beat-to-beat photoplethysmographic finger systolic arterial pressure and diastolic arterial pressure were obtained during paced breathing. Power spectra were computed using a fast Fourier transform for low-frequency (0.04-0.15 Hz) and high-frequency (0.15-0.40 Hz) powers. BRS was calculated by cross-spectral analysis of R-R interval and systolic arterial pressure variabilities. Psychological factors were evaluated by three self-report questionnaires: the Brief Symptom Inventory, the shortened version of the Spielberger State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory, and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. RESULTS: Psychological factors were not related to HRV. Anxiety was associated with decreased BRS (p = 0.001) and higher low-frequency (p = 0.002) power of systolic arterial pressure variability. These associations were independent of age, gender, other psychological factors, heart rate, and systolic and diastolic blood pressures. Hostility was an independent correlate of increased low-frequency power of diastolic arterial pressure (p = 0.001) and increased high-frequency power of systolic arterial pressure (p = 0.033) variability. CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety and hostility are related to reduced BRS and increased low-frequency power of BPV. Reduced BRS reflects decreased parasympathetic outflow to the heart and may increase BPV through an increased sympathetic predominance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".