Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine whether psychosocial work characteristics are associated with the prevalence of masked hypertension in a population of white collar workers. Methods: White-collar workers were recruited from three public organizations. Blood pressure (BP) was measured at the workplace for manual measurements (mean of the first three readings taken by a trained assistant) followed by ambulatory measurements (mean of all subsequent readings taken during the working day). Masked hypertension (MH) was defined as manual BP <140/90 mm Hg, and ambulatory BP ≥135/85 mm Hg. Job strain was evaluated, using the quadrant method for exposure assessment, as well as alternative formulations. Results: BP measurements were obtained from 2,357 workers (80% participation, 61% women; mean age, 44 years). For men, being in the active group (high psychological demands and high decision latitude) was associated with MH (adjusted odds ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.31). No significant association with a higher prevalence of MH was observed in women. Conclusion: MH is associated with job strain in men. Workers in “active” job situations may be more likely to have the condition. MH = masked hypertension; WCHT = white-coat hypertension; MBPM = manual blood pressure monitoring; ABPM = ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; DABP = diastolic ambulatory blood pressure; OBP = office blood pressure; OOBP = out-of-office blood pressure; CBP = casual blood pressure; BMI = body mass index; OR = odds ratio.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".