MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343928733 · doi:10.1111/jch.12829

Net Blood Pressure Reduction Following 9 Months of Lifestyle and High‐Intensity Interval Training Intervention in Individuals With Abdominal Obesity

2016· article· en· W2343928733 on OpenAlexaff
P. Sosner, Laurent Bosquet, D Herpin, Valérie Guilbeault, Élise Latour, L. Paquette-Tannir, Martin Juneau, Anil Nigam, Mathieu Gayda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Hypertension · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWaistBlood pressureAbdominal obesityInterval trainingObesityInternal medicineHigh-intensity interval trainingDiastoleMetabolic syndromeAbdominal fatPhysical therapyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors aimed to study the impact of a combined 9-month lifestyle program (Mediterranean diet nutritional counselling, and high-intensity interval training twice a week) on blood pressure (BP) in individuals with abdominal obesity, taking into account the regression-to-the-mean phenomena. A total of 115 participants (53±9 years; 84 women; waist circumference [WC]: 111±13 cm; systolic/diastolic BP [SBP/DBP]: 133±13/82±8 mm Hg; 13% diabetics; 12% smokers; and 30% taking antihypertensive therapy) were retrospectively analyzed before and after the program. After 9 months, we observed an improvement in weight (-5.2±5.6 kg) and WC (-6.3±6.0 cm), and an average SBP/DBP net decrease of -5.1±13.7/-2.8±8.7 mm Hg. These changes were not uniform: 67 participants (58%) decreased their SBP by 2 mm Hg or more. The characteristics of responders included a higher baseline BP than nonresponders (SBP/DBP: 137.2±13.7/83.1±7.3 mm Hg vs 127.0±10.3/80.0±7.3 mm Hg, P<.05) and a higher proportion of participants with a baseline BP ≥130/85 mm Hg (81% vs 52%, P=.001) or with the metabolic syndrome (75% vs 54%, P=.02).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical HypertensionSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207