Hypertension Analysis of stress Reduction using Mindfulness meditatiON and Yoga (The HARMONY Study): study protocol of a randomised control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hypertension (HTN) is a leading risk factor for preventable cardiovascular disease, with over one in five adults affected worldwide. Lifestyle modification is a key strategy for the prevention and treatment of HTN. Stress has been associated with greater cardiovascular risk, and stress management is a recommended intervention for hypertensives. Stress reduction through relaxation therapies has been shown to have an effect on human physiology, including lowering blood pressure (BP). However, individualised behavioural interventions are resource intensive, and group stress management approaches have not been validated for reducing HTN. The HARMONY Study is a pilot randomised controlled trial designed to determine if mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), a standardised group therapy, is an effective intervention for lowering BP in stage 1 unmedicated hypertensives. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Men and women unmedicated for HTN with mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) ≥135/85 mm Hg or 24 h ABP ≥130/80 mm Hg are included in the study. Subjects are randomised to receive MBSR immediately or after a wait-list control period. The primary outcome measure is mean awake and 24 h ABP. The primary objective of the HARMONY Study is to compare ABP between the treatment and wait-list control arm at the 12-week primary assessment period. Results from this study will determine if MBSR is an effective intervention for lowering BP in early unmedicated hypertensives. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research project was approved by the Sunnybrook Research Ethics Board and the University Health Network Research Ethics Board (Toronto, Canada). Planned analyses are in full compliance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Data collection will be completed by early spring 2012. Primary and secondary analysis will commence immediately after data monitoring is completed; dissemination plans include preparing publications for submission during the summer of 2012. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is registered with http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00825526).
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 | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.008 |
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".