The association between leptin and left ventricular hypertrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Plasma leptin levels have been shown to be an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Leptin has been shown to have sympathetic and vascular effects, and may increase cardiovascular risk through increased blood pressure, left ventricular hypertrophy, or atherosclerotic mechanisms. This study examines whether leptin levels, independent of body mass and insulin resistance, are a risk factor for hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based, cross-sectional sample of 410 adults from rural Spain was studied. The correlations between plasma leptin levels and left ventricular mass index, sum of wall thicknesses, and blood pressure were calculated. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to adjust for other cardiovascular risk factors. RESULTS: After adjusting for age, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, sex, and insulin resistance, leptin was inversely associated with left ventricular mass index (beta = -0.20, P < 0.01). Leptin was also inversely related to the sum of wall thicknesses; however, this association did not reach statistical significance (beta = -0.12, P = 0.063). Leptin was not statistically associated with blood pressure after adjusting for body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The results do not support the hypothesis that leptin increases cardiovascular risk by increasing left ventricular mass index or blood pressure. Other mechanisms, related to atherosclerosis, could explain the increased risk of cardiovascular diseases observed with high leptin levels.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".