Systolic blood pressure and risk of cardiovascular diseases in type 2 diabetes: an observational study from the Swedish national diabetes register
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To estimate risks of fatal/nonfatal coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke and cardiovascular disease (CVD) with SBP in an observational study of patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Twelve thousand, six hundred and seventy-seven patients aged 30-75 years, treated with antihypertensive drugs, without previous congestive heart failure, followed for 5 years. RESULTS: Risk curves of CHD and stroke increased progressively with higher baseline or updated mean SBP in a Cox model, in all participants, and in two subgroups without (n = 10 304) or with (n = 2373) a history of CVD, with no J-shaped risk curves at low SBP levels. Hazard ratios for CHD and stroke per 10-mmHg increase in updated mean SBP in all participants, adjusting for clinical characteristics and traditional risk factors, were 1.08 (1.04-1.13) and 1.20 (1.13-1.27), P < 0.001. With updated mean SBP of 110-129 mmHg as reference, SBP of at least 140 mmHg showed risk increases of 37% for CHD, 86% for stroke and 44% for CVD (P = 0.001 to <0.001), whereas SBP of 130-139 mmHg showed nonsignificant risk increases for these outcomes. With baseline SBP of 110-129 mmHg, CHD and CVD risks increased with further SBP reduction, hazard ratios were 1.77 and 1.73 (P = 0.002), but decreased considerably for CHD, stroke and CVD with higher baseline SBP. CONCLUSION: Risks of CHD and stroke increased progressively with higher SBP, with no J-shaped curves, although risk increase was significant only for SBP of at least 140 mmHg, but not comparing 130-139 and 110-129 mmHg. Additionally, baseline SBP of 110-129 mmHg showed increased CHD and CVD risk with further SBP reduction during follow-up, whereas baseline SBP of at least 130 showed benefits.
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) | 0.001 | 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".