MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744708584 · doi:10.1089/ham.2017.0001

Blood Pressure and Altitude: An Observational Cohort Study of Hypertensive and Nonhypertensive Himalayan Trekkers in Nepal

2017· article· en· W2744708584 on OpenAlexaff
Linda E. Keyes, T. Douglas Sallade, C. B. Duke, Jennifer Starling, Alison Sheets, Sushil Pant, David S. Young, David Twillman, Nirajan Regmi, Benoit Phelan, Purshotam Paudel, Matthew K. McElwee, Luke Mather, Devlin Cole, Theodore McConnell, Buddha Basnyat

Bibliographic record

VenueHigh Altitude Medicine & Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHigh Altitude and Hypoxia
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySaint John Regional Hospital
FundersWilderness Medical Society
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureCohortInternal medicineObservational studyDiastoleEffects of high altitude on humansCohort studyAltitude (triangle)Cardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Keyes, Linda E., Thomas Douglas Sallade, Charles Duke, Jennifer Starling, Alison Sheets, Sushil Pant, David S. Young, David Twillman, Nirajan Regmi, Benoit Phelan, Purshotam Paudel, Matthew McElwee, Luke Mather, Devlin Cole, Theodore McConnell, and Buddha Basnyat. Blood pressure and altitude: an observational cohort study of hypertensive and nonhypertensive Himalayan trekkers in Nepal. High Alt Med Biol. 18:267-277, 2017. OBJECTIVES: To determine how blood pressure (BP) changes with altitude in normotensive versus hypertensive trekkers. Secondary aims were to evaluate the prevalence of severe hypertension (BP ≥180/100 mmHg) and efficacy of different antihypertensive agents at high altitude. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of resting and 24-hour ambulatory BP in normotensive and hypertensive trekkers at 2860, 3400, and 4300 m in Nepal. RESULTS: We enrolled 672 trekkers age 18 years and older, 60 with a prior diagnosis of hypertension. Mean systolic and diastolic BP did not change between altitudes in normotensive or hypertensive trekkers, but was higher in those with hypertension. However, there was large interindividual variability. At 3400 m, the majority (60%, n = 284) of normotensive participants had a BP within 10 mmHg of their BP at 2860 m, while 21% (n = 102) increased and 19% (n = 91) decreased. The pattern was similar between 3400 and 4300 m (64% [n = 202] no change, 21% [n = 65] increased, 15% [n = 46] decreased). BP decreased in a greater proportion of hypertensive trekkers versus normotensives (36% [n = 15] vs. 21% at 3400 m, p = 0.01 and 30% [n = 7] vs. 15% at 4300 m, p = 0.05). Severe hypertension occurred in both groups, but was asymptomatic. In a small subset of participants, 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring showed that nocturnal BP decreased in normotensive (n = 4) and increased in hypertensive trekkers (n = 4). CONCLUSIONS: Most travelers, including those with well-controlled hypertension, can be reassured that their BP will remain relatively stable at high altitude. Although extremely elevated BP may be observed at high altitude in normotensive and hypertensive people, it is unlikely to be symptomatic. The ideal antihypertensive regimen at high altitude remains unclear.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigh Altitude Medicine & BiologySame topicHigh Altitude and HypoxiaFrench-language works237,207