Impact of Job and Marital Strain on Ambulatory Blood PressureResults from the Double Exposure Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychosocial stressors such as job strain and marital stress have been associated with a sustained increase in blood pressure (BP). METHODS: We evaluated whether job strain and marital cohesion were associated with ambulatory BP in workers with normal or untreated elevated BP using baseline data from the Double Exposure study. The study population included 248 male and female volunteers who were nonmedicated, employed, and living with a significant other, all for a minimum of 6 months. Blood pressure was measured with an ambulatory BP monitor and participants completed a diary that recorded time during work, spousal contact, and sleep. Job strain and marital cohesion were calculated from the Job Content Questionnaire and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale, respectively. RESULTS: Of the subjects, 54.4% were female with a mean age of 50.8 years (6.6, SD). In all, 21.3% reported job strain. Significant assocations were found between 24-h systolic BP (SBP) and alcohol consumption (P = .033), job strain (P = .007), male gender (P = .004), and age (P = .039) and was inversely associated with exercise (P = .037). An interaction between 24-h SBP, job strain, and marital cohesion was found such that greater marital cohesion was associated with lower SBP in subjects with job strain. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial factors may influence the development of early hypertension. This should be clarified by the cohort phase of the Double Exposure study.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".