Persistence of elevated blood pressure during childhood and adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Blood pressure (BP) screening is advocated in children. However, identification of children with sustained elevated BP is difficult because of high BP variability. We assessed the tracking of BP and the persistence of elevated BP across childhood and adolescence. METHODS: Three cohorts of children from schools in the Seychelles were examined on two occasions at 3-4-year intervals. Obesity was defined as BMI at least 95th sex-specific, and age-specific percentile. On each visit, BP was based on the average of two readings and elevated BP was defined as BP at least 95th sex-specific, age-specific, and height-specific percentile. RESULTS: Data was collected in 4519 children of mean ages of 5.5 and 9.2 years, 6065 of ages of 9.2 and 12.5 years, and 5967 of ages of 12.5 and 15.6 years, respectively. Prevalence of elevated BP was 10% at age 5.5 years, 10% at 9.2 years, 7% at 12.5 years, and 9% at 15.6 years, respectively. Among children with elevated BP at the initial visit, the proportions who had elevated BP at the subsequent visit 3-4 years later was 13% between ages of 5.5 and 9.2 years, 19% between 9.2 and 12.5 years, and 27% between 12.5 and 15.6 years. These proportions were higher among obese children with elevated BP, that is, 33, 35, and 39%, in each cohort, respectively. Tracking coefficients were slightly larger for SBP (range of tracking coefficients: 0.23-0.40) than for DBP (range: 0.19-0.35), and increased with age. By comparisons, tracking coefficients for BMI were much higher (range: 0.74-0.84). CONCLUSION: During childhood and adolescence, having an elevated BP on one occasion is a weak predictor of elevated BP 3-4 years later. Tracking is, however, larger in older and obese children than in younger and nonobese children.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".