Relationship between changes in blood pressure and left ventricular mass over 1 year in end-stage renal disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The optimal timing of blood pressure (BP) measurement is not firmly established for patients undergoing hemodialysis. We sought to assess which BP measurement change best correlates with changes in left ventricular mass index (LVMI) over 1 year in patients with end-stage renal disease. METHODS: Fifty-seven patients were included in a prospective cohort study comparing the cardiovascular impact of conversion to in-center nocturnal hemodialysis versus continuing conventional hemodialysis. BP measurements were recorded at different time points (predialysis, after initiation of dialysis, at the intradialytic nadir, and postdialysis) during dialysis sessions over 12 weeks at baseline and after 1-year follow-up. LVMI was independently measured by a single blinded reader using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and 1 year. RESULTS: Overall, the mean LVMI was 69.9 g/m (standard deviation 15.9) at baseline and 69.6 g/m (standard deviation 16.0) at 1 year. The change in initiation mean arterial pressure (MAP) most strongly correlated with the change in LVMI (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.71, P < 0.001). The relationship was similar in both dialysis groups and in multivariable analysis. In pairwise comparisons, initiation MAP was more strongly correlated with the change in LVMI than nadir and postdialysis measurements (all P < 0.05). However, the correlation was not stronger than predialysis SBP (P = 0.33). CONCLUSION: The change in initiation MAP correlated best with the change in LVMI over 1 year in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Further studies are needed to determine whether it represents a potentially useful treatment target to prevent adverse ventricular remodeling, thereby improving cardiovascular outcome.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00718848.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".