Prognostic Value of Low Diastolic 24-H Blood Pressure in Type 2 Diabetic Patients in a Follow-Up of 4.7 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The prognostic implications of the 24 hours ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (AMBP) have been progressively established but some issues remain controversial about the prognostic value of circadian blood pressure (BP) profile in some high-risk populations, namely the diabetics. Methods: We followed, for 4.7 ± 3.5 years, 262 type 2 diabetic patients without previous cardiovascular events after AMBPs, on the occurrence of a combination of coronary events and stroke. Results: There were 36 events (18 coronary and 18 strokes), 7 of them fatal. Half the population showed a non-dipping pattern (non-dippers plus reverse dippers) and the later conveyed a lower survival rate free from strokes (log rank 6.99; P 75 mmHg) 24H DBP, but not in the group with 24H DBP below 75 mmHg, the 24H systolic BP value was an independent predictor of global events in the multivariate analysis (HR 0.03; 95%CI 0.09 - 0.57; P < 0.002), showing decreased event-free survival in the Kaplan-Meier curves (log rank 9.15; P < 0.003). Conclusion: In our population of diabetic type 2 patients 24H DBP had an impact on prognosis on its own, particularly for its lower values. Thus low values of 24H DBP are associated with high cardiovascular risk. J Endocrinol Metab. 2013;3(1-2):16-23 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/jem155e
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".