MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2431487376 · doi:10.1161/hyp.66.suppl_1.p075

Abstract P075: Stroke Volume and Visceral Fat Drive Differences in Blood Pressure Between Two Generations: A Population-Based Study of Adolescents and Their Parents

2015· article· en· W2431487376 on OpenAlexaffabout
Catriona Syme, Michał Abrahamowicz, Gabriel Leonard, Michel Perron, Louis Richer, Suzanne Veillette, Daniel Gaudet, Tomáš Paus, Zdenka Pausová

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of TorontoUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiMcGill UniversityHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioelectrical impedance analysisMedicineBlood pressureHemodynamicsStroke volumeCardiologyHeart rateStroke (engine)PopulationInternal medicineVascular resistanceBody mass index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Excess total body fat (TBF) and visceral fat (VF) are major risk factors of hypertension. Blood pressure (BP) increases with age, as do TBF and VF. Here we investigated whether TBF and VF contribute to BP differences between adolescents and adults. A population-based sample of adolescents (n=933, 12-18 years) and their parents (n=429, 38-65 years) was studied as part of the Saguenay Youth Study. In all participants, beat-by-beat values of SBP, DBP and underlying hemodynamic parameters (heart rate, stroke volume [SV] and total peripheral resistance) were obtained with a Finometer during a 52-minute protocol mimicking daily life activities and including posture and math-stress tests. TBF was assessed by bioelectrical impedance and VF was examined by magnetic resonance imaging. SBP was higher in parents than adolescents by an average of 10.2±0.3 mmHg in males and 9.1±0.3 mmHg in females (p<0.0001 for both sexes). DBP differed minimally throughout the protocol (p=0.3 and 0.1, respectively). In males and females, respectively, the ‘generation’ differences in SBP were reduced to 6.0±0.1 and 4.3±0.1 mmHg when adjusted for height and TBF (p<0.0001 for both), and were further reduced to 1.9±0.1 and 2.5±0.2 mmHg when additionally adjusted for VF (p=0.1 and 0.02). Of the underlying hemodynamic parameters, only SV was higher in parents than adolescents (by 46±2 ml in males and 39±2 ml in females, p<0.0001 for both). Again, the ‘generation’ differences in SV were reduced to 23±1 (males) and 20±1 ml (females) when adjusted for height and TBF (p<0.0001 for both sexes), and were further reduced to 11.8±0.6 and 15.7±0.8 ml when additionally adjusted for VF (p<0.0001 for both sexes). These results suggest that the transition from adolescence to middle-aged adulthood is associated with an increase in SBP (but not DBP), which is driven mainly by SV augmentation. They also suggest that VF contributes to the generational differences in both SBP and SV above and beyond the contribution of TBF, despite VF being a relatively small fraction of TBF. The co-occurrence of these differences in VF, SV and SBP may be related to sympathoactivation and renal handling of sodium and water reabsorption; further research is required to confirm this possibility.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207