Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the high prevalence of depression and hypertension, the relationship between the two diseases has received little attention. This paper reviews the epidemiological, pathophysiological, and prognostic aspects of this association, as well as its implications for treatment. A Medline search was conducted using the following key words: depression, blood pressure, blood pressure variability, physical morbidity, hypertension, mood, stress, hypertension, antidepressive agents, and genetics, from 1980 to 2004. We found descriptions of increased prevalence of hypertension in depressed patients, increased prevalence of depression in hypertensive patients, association between depressive symptomatology and hypotension, and alteration of the circadian variation of blood pressure in depressed patients. There is considerable evidence suggesting that hyperreactivity of the sympathetic nervous system and genetic influences are the underlying mechanisms in the relationship between depression and hypertension. Depression can negatively affect the course of hypertensive illness. Additionally, the use of antidepressive agents can interfere with blood pressure control of patients with hypertension by inducing changes in blood pressure and orthostatic hypotension.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it