The role of dietary cations in the blood pressure of renal transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of dietary cations in hypertension has been evaluated in the general population and selected subgroups, but its contribution to blood pressure (BP) elevations in patients with functional renal allografts has not been critically examined. METHODS: After counseling based on Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) guidelines, we measured timed 24-h urine excretion rates of sodium, potassium, calcium, and magnesium as a surrogate for their dietary intake, in 244 stable adult single-organ renal transplant recipients, correlating these with averaged blinded clinic-measured BP values. Multiple linear regression analysis adjusting for factors affecting BP in transplant recipients was performed. RESULTS: There was no correlation between systolic (SBP) or diastolic pressure (DBP) and 24-h urine excretion rates of each cation. There was no BP difference between patients receiving cyclosporine and tacrolimus (127/77 vs. 129/78 mmHg, p = 0.38), or in cation excretion except for calcium (2.85 +/- 2.0 vs. 2.90 +/- 2.8, p = 0.002). Protein excretion (p < 0.0001), age (p = 0.002), and weight (p = 0.04) were positively associated with SBP, while only weight (p = 0.01) was associated with DBP by multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Dietary cation intake is not significantly associated with BP in renal transplant recipients. These data do not support recommendations to alter dietary cation intake as part of the management of post-transplantation hypertension.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".