Alcohol and hypertension: gender differences in dose–response relationships determined through systematic review and meta‐analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To analyze the dose-response relationship between average daily alcohol consumption and the risk of hypertension via systematic review and meta-analysis. DESIGN: A computer-assisted search was completed for 10 databases, followed by hand searches of relevant articles. Only studies with longitudinal design, quantitative measurement of alcohol consumption and biological measurement of outcome were included. Dose-response relationships were assessed by determining the best-fitting model via first- and second-degree fractional polynomials. Various tests for heterogeneity and publication bias were conducted. FINDINGS: A total of 12 cohort studies were identified from the literature from the United States, Japan and Korea. A linear dose-response relationship with a relative risk of 1.57 at 50 g pure alcohol per day and 2.47 at 100 g per day was seen for men. Among women, the meta-analysis indicated a more modest protective effect than reported previously: a significant protective effect was reported for consumption at or below about 5 g per day, after which a linear dose-response relationship was found with a relative risk of 1.81 at 50 g per day and of 2.81 at an average daily consumption of 100 g pure alcohol per day. Among men, Asian populations had higher risks than non-Asian populations. CONCLUSIONS: The risk for hypertension increases linearly with alcohol consumption, so limiting alcohol intake should be advised for both men and women.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it