Knee Osteoarthritis and Risk of Hypertension: A Longitudinal Cohort Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although previous research has indicated an association between osteoarthritis (OA) and cardiovascular disease, it remains unclear whether people with OA are at greater risk of developing hypertension. The aim of this study was to answer this uncertainity. We used the data of the Osteoarthritis Initiative, an ongoing public and private longitudinal study including people at higher risk of OA or having knee OA. Knee OA was defined through radiological and clinical assessment. Incident hypertension was defined as a systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg and/or a diastolic value ≥90 mmHg. Multivariate Cox's regression analyses were constructed considering the presence of knee OA as the exposure and incident hypertension as the outcome during a 96-month follow-up interval. A total of 3558 people with normative blood pressure values at baseline were analyzed (1930 OA/1628 controls). Incidence of hypertension within the follow-up interval was significantly higher in people with knee OA than in those without (60/[1000 person-years] vs. 55/[1000 person-years]; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for 13 confounders, people with knee OA had a 13% higher chance of developing hypertension (hazard ratio = 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.26; p = 0.03). Propensity score analysis did not alter these conclusions. In conclusion, this is the first longitudinal data analysis to demonstrate that people with knee OA have a higher chance of developing hypertension than those without OA. Our data suggest that monitoring blood pressure and prescribing health promotion interventions may be warranted among people with OA to mitigate the potential onset and adverse consequences of hypertension.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it