The Impact of Job Strain and Marital Cohesion on Ambulatory Blood Pressure During 1 Year: The Double Exposure Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychosocial and lifestyle stressors, such as job strain and marital factors, have previously been associated with a sustained increase in blood pressure (BP). METHODS: In a 1-year longitudinal study, we evaluated whether job strain and marital cohesion continued to be associated with ambulatory blood pressure (ABP). The final study cohort included 229 male and female volunteers who were still employed and living with a significant other as at baseline and could complete all aspects of the follow-up testing. RESULTS: The interaction between job strain and marital cohesion was significantly associated with a change in ABP during 1 year for 24-h systolic BP but not diastolic BP (P = .018 and .13, respectively). This association also occurred for job strain (P = .011). Subjects with high job strain and a low cohesive marriage had an increase in systolic BP by 3 mm Hg during 1 year, and those with job strain who also had a highly cohesive marriage had a reduction of systolic BP by 3 mm Hg during 1 year. An exploratory analysis for gender effects found that the interaction between job strain and marital cohesion was found only in women (P = .025). CONCLUSIONS: Marital cohesion consistently interacted with the sustained elevation of BP associated with job strain over time in men and women. Low marital cohesion exacerbated the effect of job strain to elevate BP and high marital cohesion ameliorated it. This interaction may be gender specific in that it was demonstrated separately in women but not in men.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it