Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sodium is an essential nutrient. Increasing sodium intake is associated with increasing blood pressure, whereas low sodium intake results in increased renin and aldosterone levels. Randomized controlled trials have reported reductions in blood pressure with reductions in sodium intake, to levels of sodium intake <1.5 g/d, and form the evidentiary basis for current population-wide guidelines recommending low sodium intake. Although low sodium intake (<2.0 g/d) has been achieved in short-term feeding clinical trials, sustained low sodium intake has not been achieved by any of the longer term clinical trials (>6-month duration). It is assumed that the blood pressure-lowering effects of reducing sodium intake to low levels will result in large reductions in cardiovascular disease globally. However, current evidence from prospective cohort studies suggests a J-shaped association between sodium intake and cardiovascular events, based on studies from >300 000 people, and suggests that the lowest risk of cardiovascular events and death occurs in populations consuming an average sodium intake range (3-5 g/d). The increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with higher sodium intake (>5 g/d) is most prominent in those with hypertension. A major deficit in the field is the absence of large randomized controlled trials to provide definitive evidence on optimal sodium intake for preventing cardiovascular events. Pending such trials, current evidence would suggest a recommendation for moderate sodium intake in the general population (3-5 g/d), with targeting the lower end of the moderate range among those with hypertension.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".