MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945824604 · doi:10.1186/s12887-019-1505-8

Parental smoking and blood pressure in children and adolescents: a national cross-sectional study in China

2019· article· en· W2945824604 on OpenAlexaff
Zilong Zhang, Jun Ma, Zhenghe Wang, Yanhui Dong, Zhaogeng Yang, Yinghua Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pediatrics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Ontario
FundersPeking University Health Science CenterPeking University
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureCross-sectional studyOdds ratioConfidence intervalConfoundingLogistic regressionPediatricsDemographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Current evidence on the health effects of passive smoking on childhood blood pressure is limited and inconsistent. We investigated the associations between exposure to parental smoking and blood pressure in children and adolescents. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was performed in a national sample of 42,745 children and adolescents (50.2% boys) aged 7-18 years from seven provinces in China. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured. Information on parental smoking was collected through questionnaire. Multivariable linear regression and logistic regression was used to investigate the associations of parental smoking with blood pressure and prevalent hypertension, respectively. RESULTS: The reported parental smoking rates were 49.7 and 50.2% in boys and girls, respectively. After adjustment for a range of potential confounders, exposure to parental smoking was associated with 0.44 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.16, 0.72] mmHg and 0.26 (95% CI: 0.04, 0.47) mmHg higher SBP and DBP in girls. Girls exposed to parental smoking were also more likely to have hypertension compared with those without exposure (odds ratio = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.20). No significant associations were found in boys. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to parental smoking was associated with increased blood pressure and higher prevalence of hypertension in girls, but not in boys. Urgent strategies are needed for the promotion of smoking-free environment, especially for children and adolescents.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PediatricsSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207