MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121035304 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014086

Sex Differences in Step Count-Blood Pressure Association: A Preliminary Study in Type 2 Diabetes

2010· article· en· W2121035304 on OpenAlexafffund
Priya Manjoo, Lawrence Joseph, Louise Pilote, Kaberi Dasgupta

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreIsland Health
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineGlycated hemoglobinPedometerAnthropometryBody mass indexEndocrinologyPhysical therapyPhysical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Walking and cardiovascular mortality are inversely associated in type 2 diabetes, but few studies have objectively measured associations of walking with individual cardiovascular risk factors. Such information would be useful for "dosing" daily steps in clinical practice. This study aimed to quantify decrements in blood pressure and glycated hemoglobin (A1C) per 1,000 daily step increments. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Two hundred and one subjects with type 2 diabetes underwent assessments of step counts (pedometer-measured), blood pressure, A1C and anthropometric parameters. Due to missing data, the final analysis was conducted on 83 women and 102 men, with a mean age of 60 years. Associations of daily steps with blood pressure and A1C were evaluated using sex-specific multivariate linear regression models (adjusted for age, ethnicity, and BMI). Potential sex differences were confirmed in a combined model (women and men) with interaction terms. Mean values for daily steps, blood pressure, A1C and BMI were 5,357 steps/day; 137/80 mm Hg; 7.7% and 30.4 kg/m(2) respectively. A 1,000 daily step increment among women was associated with a -2.6 (95% CI: -4.1 to -1.1) mm Hg change in systolic and a -1.4 (95% CI: -2.2 to -0.6) mm Hg change in diastolic blood pressure. Among men, corresponding changes were -0.7 (95% CI: -2.1 to 0.7) and -0.6 (95% CI: -1.4 to 0.3) mm Hg, respectively. Sex differences were confirmed in combined models. Step counts and A1C did not demonstrate clinically important associations. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: A 1,000 steps/day increment is associated with important blood pressure decrements among women with type 2 diabetes but the data were inconclusive among men. Targeted "dose increments" of 1,000 steps/day in women may lead to measurable blood pressure reductions. This information may be of potential use in the titration or "dosing" of daily steps. No associations were found between step count increments and A1C.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207