Can Blood Pressure Be Lowered Safely in Older Adults with Lacunar Stroke? The Secondary Prevention of Small Subcortical Strokes Study Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine safety and tolerability of lowering blood pressure in older adults with lacunar stroke. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: The Secondary Prevention of Small Subcortical Strokes (SPS3) Trial, which compared the efficacy of two systolic blood pressure (SBP) targets (<130 mmHg and 130-149 mmHg) for secondary stroke prevention. PARTICIPANTS: Of 3,020 SPS3 participants, 494 aged 75 and older at baseline were used in these analyses. MEASUREMENTS: Rates of side effects related to lowering SBP and clinical outcomes, including stroke recurrence and vascular death, were examined. RESULTS: Older participants achieved SBP levels similar to those of younger participants (mean SBP of 125 mmHg and 137 mmHg in lower and higher SBP target groups, respectively). At least once during the approximately 3.5 years of follow-up, 21% reported dizziness, and 15% reported lightheadedness when standing; the only significant difference between the younger and older groups was unsteadiness when standing (23% vs 32% respectively, P < .001). There was no difference according to treatment group. In younger adults, recurrent stroke was less likely in the lower than the higher SBP group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.59-1.01) but not in older participants (HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.59-1.73), although the interaction was not significant (P = .39). The lower SBP target was associated with a significant reduction in vascular death in older participants (HR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.18-0.98), with a significant interaction between age and SBP group (P = .049). CONCLUSION: Except for unsteadiness when standing, there was no difference according to age in individuals with lacunar stroke with respect to side effects potentially related to lowering blood pressure. Although the lower SBP target was not associated with lower likelihood of recurrent stroke, these exploratory analyses suggested a possible benefit related to vascular death.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".