MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027124758 · doi:10.1291/hypres.31.37

A Study of the White-Coat Phenomenon in Patients with Primary Hypertension

2008· article· en· W2027124758 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSphygmomanometerMedicineWhite coat hypertensionBlood pressureDiastoleInternal medicineCardiologyMean differencePhysical therapyAmbulatory blood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the discrepancy between clinic and home blood pressure (BP) in hypertensive subjects would disappear or diminish in magnitude if the BP measurement was taken under controlled conditions differing only with respect to location (clinic vs. home). Three hundred and sixty-seven patients aged 34-84 years with primary hypertension were enrolled. All of the patients or their spouses were taught to measure BP correctly with their own sphygmomanometer at home. The home BP value (HBP) was calculated as the average of 45 readings over 15 days. On days 6, 12, and 18 of the measurement period, rather than measuring their BP at home, patients and their spouses were asked to visit the hospital at the usual time of their BP measurement and to bring their own sphygmomanometer. The clinic BP value (CBP) was calculated as the average of the 9 readings taken on these visits by the patients or their spouses. The "white-coat phenomenon" (WCP) was considered to be present when the difference between the CBP and HBP was greater than 20/10 mmHg. The mean reading of home systolic/diastolic BP was 134.7/79.1 mmHg and the mean reading of clinic systolic/diastolic BP was 149.8/86.4 mmHg. In the total subject group, the prevalence rate of WCP was 31%-35% if the WCP was defined as DeltaBP (CBP - HBP) > or =20 mmHg/10 mmHg. In conclusion, ruling out the influence of different factors, including time of day, the sphygmomanometer, the individual taking the BP measurement, the climate, and the patients' health or mood, the WCP was still found to exist to a statistically significant degree. This study indicated that teaching patients to measure their own BP at home is an effective procedure to obtain a more accurate result of their BP level. It also helped to involve the patients more actively in controlling their 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it