Hypertension, Pulse, and Other Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Vitamin D Status in Finnish Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Debate exists about the relationship between hypovitaminosis D and cardiovascular (CVD) risk. METHODS: This study investigated baseline (n=2,271) 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and baseline and 4 year (n=1,957) CVD risk in a cohort of Finnish middle-aged male smokers. RESULTS: The prevalences of measured hypertension, high pulse rate, diabetes, and coronary heart disease were 63%, 16%, 5%, and 10% at baseline and were 64%, 20%, 6%, and 16% at 4 years after baseline. The mean 25(OH)D was 41±18 nmol/L. At baseline, systolic blood pressure (β = -0.048; P = 0.02), and pulse rate (β = -0.043; P = 0.04) were both associated with lower 25(OH)D levels but not coronary heart disease or diabetes prevalence. On remeasuring CVD risk 4 years after baseline, the only significant association with baseline 25(OH)D levels was high pulse rate (β = -0.077; P = 0.001). In addition, a higher 25(OH)D level at baseline was associated with a change in pulse rate (β = -0.055; P = 0.01). These trends for hypertension (baseline) and high pulse rate (baseline and 4 years after baseline) were also seen on adjusted categorical analysis (P trend < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D deficiency at baseline was associated with hypertension in Finnish male smokers, but not after 4 years. These results are consistent with recent findings in other large cohort studies with measured blood pressure. Change in pulse rate over time continued to be significantly associated with lower 25(OH)D baseline levels; this new finding should be investigated further.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".