MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320606434 · doi:10.1097/mbp.0000000000000097

Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of a forearm blood pressure measurement method in severe obesity

2015· article· en· W2320606434 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Éve Leblanc, Lyne Cloutier, Paul Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Pressure Monitoring · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureForearmGold standard (test)Predictive valueInternal medicineCardiologyObesityPredictive value of testsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For blood pressure assessment, it has been reported that forearm blood pressure measurement appears to be as valid as an upper-arm blood pressure measurement method in individuals with severe obesity when correlated to the intra-arterial method, considered as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for the presence of systemic hypertension in 25 severely obese patients from 352 blood pressure measurements were calculated. The sensitivity (0.98) and the positive predictive value (0.93) for hypertension on forearm blood pressure measurements are excellent, indicating that the forearm approach is a promising alternative to systemic hypertension diagnosis in severe 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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood Pressure MonitoringSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207