MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562514678 · doi:10.14740/cr481w

Chlorthalidone Plus Amiloride Reduces the Central Systolic Blood Pressure in Stage 1 Hypertension Patients

2016· article· en· W2562514678 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Letícia Aparecida Barufi Fernandes, Elizabeth do Espírito Santo Cestário, Luciana Neves Cosenso‐Martin, José Fernando Vilela-Martin, Juan Carlos Yugar‐Toledo, Flávio Danni Fuchs

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureChlorthalidoneCardiologyInternal medicinePulse pressureThiazideLosartanBrachial arteryAortic pressurePrehypertensionAngiotensin II

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Hypertension reduction strategies use blood pressure in the brachial artery as the primary endpoint. Individuals who achieve the target blood pressure reduction with antihypertensive treatment have residual cardiovascular risk attributed to the difference in pressure between the aorta and brachial artery. Antihypertensive treatment affects the intrinsic properties of the vascular wall and arterial stiffness markers and consequently the central pressure. Recent publications stress the importance of adequate control of the central compared to peripheral blood pressure. Related clinical implications suggest that individuals with normal peripheral but high central blood pressure should not receive antihypertensive drugs that act on the central pressure. Therefore, they are at greater cardiovascular risk. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of treatment with a thiazide diuretic versus losartan on the central blood pressure in stage 1 hypertensive patients. Methods: Twenty-five patients were randomized to the chlorthalidone 25 mg/amiloride 5 mg group (q.d.) and 25 patients received losartan 50 mg (b.i.d). The central systolic blood pressure (CSBP) and augmentation index (AIx 75) were assessed using applanation tonometry. The paired t -test was used to compare the systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), pulse pressure (PP), CSBP and AIx 75 between the thiazide and losartan groups at baseline and after 6 months of treatment. Results: Significant reductions in CSBP (123.3 ± 14.2 vs. 113.4 ± 111.4, P = 0.0103) and AIx 75 (87.7 ± 9.6 vs. 83.8 ± 8.9, P = 0.0289) were observed after 6 months of drug treatment with chlorthalidone 25 mg/amiloride 5 mg (q.d.). The administration of losartan 50 mg (b.i.d) did not reduce the CSBP and there were insignificant changes in the AIx 75. Conclusions: Six-month treatment of chlorthalidone/amiloride but not losartan reduces the CSBP and AIx 75 in adults with stage 1 hypertension. Cardiol Res. 2016;7(6):196-201 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/cr481w Â

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology ResearchSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207