Sex Differences in Blood Pressure and Its Relationship to Body Composition and Metabolism in Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate during adolescence (1) sex differences in blood pressure (BP) and hemodynamic factors at rest and during physical and mental challenges and (2) whether these differences are mediated by body composition and glucose and lipid metabolism. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of a population-based cohort. SETTING: Saguenay Youth Study, Quebec, Canada, from November 2003 to June 2007. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 425 adolescents (225 girls aged 12-18 years). OUTCOME MEASURES: Systolic and diastolic BP measured using a Finometer. Secondary outcome measures were (1) hemodynamic parameters also measured with a Finometer, (2) body composition assessed with magnetic resonance imaging, bioimpedance, and anthropometry, and (3) metabolic indices determined from a fasting blood sample. RESULTS: Girls vs boys demonstrated lower systolic and diastolic BP at rest and during challenges, with the differences being greatest during a math-stress test (adjusted difference, 7 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4-10 mm Hg and adjusted difference, 6 mm Hg; 95% CI, 4-8 mm Hg, respectively). The differences were mainly due to girls vs boys having lower stroke volume while lying down, standing (adjusted difference, 4 mL; 95% CI, 1-7 mL), and sitting, and lower total peripheral resistance during the math-stress test (adjusted difference, 0.14 mm Hg . s/mL; 95% CI, 0.09-0.21 mm Hg . s/mL). Intra-abdominal fat was positively associated with BP, but less in girls than in boys, and fat-free mass, fat mass, and insulin resistance were also positively associated with BP, similarly in boys and girls. CONCLUSIONS: In adolescence, BP is lower in girls than boys, with the difference being determined mainly by lower stroke volume during physical challenges and by lower total peripheral resistance during mental challenges. Body composition and insulin resistance contribute to these differences.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".