Association of calcium concentration with pulse pressure in older women: Data from a large population-based multicentric study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: High arterial pulse pressure is a predictor of cardiovascular morbimortality. Mineral metabolism has been associated with blood pressure regulation. Our objective was to determine which variable among serum calcium, parathyroid hormone and 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations, was associated with pulse pressure among older adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study corresponding to the baseline assessment of the EPIDOS study. SETTING: Five French cities including Amiens, Lyon, Montpellier, Paris and Toulouse. PARTICIPANTS: Randomized sample of 610 community-dwelling older women (mean age 80.2±3.5years) using no antihypertensive drugs. MEASUREMENTS: Serum calcium, parathyroid hormone and 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations; supine pulse pressure after 15 minutes of rest (hypertension defined as pulse pressure >50mmHg). Age, body mass index, the number of morbidities and of drugs daily taken, diabetes mellitus, dysthyroidy, the use of estrogenic drugs, smoking, alcohol consumption, practice of a regular physical activity, creatinine clearance, and the effects of season and study centers were used as potential confounders. RESULTS: Hypertensive participants (n=539) had higher calcium concentrations than normotensive ones (94.33±4.12mg/L versus 93.28±3.36mg/L respectively, P=0.040). There were no between-group differences for serum parathyroid hormone and 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations. The multiple logistic regressions examining the serum calcium, parathyroid hormone and 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations as predictors of hypertension found an association only with calcium (adjusted odds ratio=1.19, P=0.015), but not with parathyroid hormone (adjusted OR=1.01, P=0.349) or 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration (adjusted OR=0.99, P=0.971). CONCLUSION: Increased serum calcium concentration was independently and positively associated with high pulse pressure in our study, possibly due to increased arterial stiffness. Interventions aimed at normalizing calcaemia may be attractive to prevent hypertension and cardiovascular risk in older adults.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".