Control of blood pressure and risk of mortality in a cohort of older adults: the Berlin Initiative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To assess whether blood pressure (BP) values below 140/90 mmHg during antihypertensive treatment are associated with a decreased risk of all-cause mortality in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS AND RESULTS: Within the Berlin Initiative Study, we assembled a cohort of patients ≥70 years treated with antihypertensive drugs at baseline (November 2009-June 2011). End of prospective follow-up was December 2016. Cox proportional hazards models yielded adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of all-cause mortality associated with normalized BP [systolic BP (SBP) <140 mmHg and diastolic BP (DBP) <90 mmHg] compared with non-normalized BP (SBP ≥140 mmHg or DBP ≥90 mmHg) overall and after stratification by age or previous cardiovascular events. Among 1628 patients (mean age 81 years) on antihypertensive drugs, 636 exhibited normalized BP. During 8853 person-years of follow-up, 469 patients died. Compared with non-normalized BP, normalized BP was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (incidence rates: 60.3 vs. 48.5 per 1000/year; HR 1.26; 95% CI 1.04-1.54). Increased risks were observed in patients ≥80 years (102.2 vs. 77.5 per 1000/year; HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.12-1.74) and with previous cardiovascular events (98.3 vs. 63.6 per 1000/year; HR 1.61; 95% CI 1.14-2.27) but not in patients aged 70-79 years (22.6 vs. 22.7 per 1000/year; HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.54-1.27) or without previous cardiovascular events (45.2 vs. 44.4 per 1000/year; HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90-1.48). CONCLUSION: Blood pressure values below 140/90 mmHg during antihypertensive treatment may be associated with an increased risk of mortality in octogenarians or elderly patients with previous cardiovascular events.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".