Determinants of masked hypertension in hypertensive patients treated in a primary care setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent data suggest that masked hypertension (MH) carries a cardiovascular risk similar to that of uncontrolled hypertension. AIMS: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and determinants of MH in patients treated for hypertension in a Canadian primary care setting. METHODS: Office blood pressure (OBP) was measured at baseline and after 3 months of valsartan-based therapy in 5636 hypertensive patients who had recorded their home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) for seven consecutive days at month 3 using an Omron HEM-711 apparatus. MH was defined in nondiabetic patients as an OBP <140/90 mmHg and an HBPM ≥135/85 mmHg, and in those with diabetes as an OBP <130/80 mmHg and an HBPM ≥125/75 mmHg. RESULTS: Of the 5636 patients, 1025 had diabetes. OBP was controlled at 3 months in 268 (26.1%) of them, but 167 (62.3%) had MH. OBP was controlled in 2728 (59.1%) of the 4611 patients without diabetes, and 935 (34.3%) of them had MH. Overall, 1102 patients had MH, representing 36.8% of patients with controlled OBP and 19.6% of the entire hypertensive study population. Stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis in nondiabetic patients with controlled OBP at 3 months revealed that older age, male sex, higher body mass index and higher office systolic blood pressure were determinants of MH. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that one of five hypertensive patients and more than one of three with controlled OBP will have MH. MH is associated with other cardiovascular risk factors, such as diabetes, and in nondiabetics, with male sex, older age and obesity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".