The Effect of Occupational Lifting on Hypertension Risk: Protocol for a Project Using Data From the Copenhagen City Heart Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and is responsible for 14% of all annual deaths globally. The prevalence of hypertension varies across occupational groups, possibly affected by differences in the working environment. One work-related factor that might impose a risk for hypertension is lifting due to the acute large increases in blood pressure (BP) during lifting. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to explore associations between heavy occupational lifting and hypertension in the Copenhagen City Heart Study. METHODS: This study will use data from the third, fourth, and fifth examination of the Copenhagen City Heart Study. The dataset contains person-based information on health as well as a large variety of biological, environmental, and lifestyle-related factors. Using a cross-sectional design, we will investigate the association between heavy occupational lifting and hypertension, defined as using antihypertensive drugs or having a measured systolic BP (SBP) ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic BP (DBP) ≥90 mm Hg. Furthermore, in a prospective design, we will investigate the association between heavy occupational lifting and risk of becoming an SBP case, defined as the shift from not using antihypertensive drugs in examination n to use of antihypertensive drugs in examination n+1 or an above median delta value of SBP (SBP in examination n+1−SBP in examination n). RESULTS: In the third examination in 1991-1994, 10,135 out of 16,560 participants attended (61.20%), in the fourth examination in 2001-2003, 6237 out of 12,599 participants attended (49.50%), and in the fifth examination in 2011-2015, 4550 out of 9765 participants attended (46.59%). On the basis of the inclusion criteria of answering to the level of occupational physical activity, 5031 observations were excluded from examination 3, 2600 from examination 4, and 1621 from examination 5. Hence, the final populations for the cross-sectional and prospective analysis are assumed to include less than 7166 participants in the cross-sectional analysis and less than 1850 participants in the prospective analysis due to the additional inclusion criteria of measured BP and use of antihypertensive drugs. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of the workforce in Europe reports to carry or move heavy loads regularly during working hours (6th survey in Eurofound). Thus, if this study shows occupational lifting to increase the risk for hypertension, the prevention for hypertension can be improved.
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 | 0.040 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.012 |
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".