Effects of Occupational Noise on Blood Pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Noise has been found to have non auditory effects. One of the possible non auditory effects of noise is its effect on blood pressure. Available data on the effect of noise on blood pressure has been found to vary. Hence, the aim of this study was to find if there is a predictive effect of noise on blood pressure. METHOD: Study was done among sawmill workers in Ile-Ife. The noise in each sawmill was measured with a sound meter and blood pressure of each participants were recorded. A regression analysis was done using systolic and diastolic blood pressures as dependent variables and noise as the predictor. RESULTS: A total of 420 sawmill workers were recruited into the study with an average age of 33.53±8.59 years. The average noise level in the sawmill was 88±1.87 dB and the average systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 132 ± 21mmHg and 85 ± 13mmHg respectively. There was no significant effect of noise on systolic blood pressure {F (1, 419) = 0.958, P>0.05} but there was a significant effect of noise on diastolic pressure {F (1, 419) = 7.543, P<0.05}. CONCLUSION: This study found that exposure to noise is a predisposing factor to increase in blood pressure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".