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 OpenAlex
Marie‐Éve Leblanc, Lyne Cloutier, Paul Poirier

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
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