Prevalence of Inter Arm Blood Pressure Difference among Type 2 Diabetics in Primary Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypertension in patients with diabetes is a common problem; it increases the risk of cardiovascular, renal and ophthalmologic complications. Appropriate measurement of blood pressure is important, as the readings are the target of all pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment. The aim of the present study was to observe the prev-alence of significant difference in blood pressure in the arms in type 2 Diabetics and to establish if there is association between inter-arm blood pressure difference (IAD) and cardiovascular risk. A cross sectional study conducted in 5 primary care health centers. BP measurements were done by automatic Omron 7 machine; the measure-ments were done two times with interchanging the instruments between two arms. Da-ta collection included demographic data (including, age, sex, body mass index (BMI), waist circumferences, duration of Diabetes, history of HTN, and smoking status).The data collection form also included entry of last biochemical investigations done in-cluding total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, triglyceride, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and Cardiovascular risk (CV risk ) calculated by UKPDS engine version 2.0. Data was analyzed with SPSS (version 19). A total of 155 patients were studied. Mean age of patients was 55yrs. 22 participants (14.2, 95% CI=9.1-20.7) had systolic IAD >10 mmHg, 51 (33%, 95% CI=25.6-40.9) had a diastolic IAD >5 mmHg and 9 (5.8 %, 95% CI=2.7-10.7) had a diastolic difference >10 mmHg. In addition, the results showed statistically significant correlation between systolic interarm BP difference and duration of diabetes (P=0.025).There is significant diastolic interarm blood pres-sure difference in diabetic patients. Hence it is important to measure the blood pres-sure in both arms for patients with diabetes to treat hypertension in diabetics appropri-ately.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".