Unhealthy behavior and risk of hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the individual and combined association between unhealthy behavior and hypertension (HTN). METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional analysis using data from the population-based cohort study CONSTANCES. Blood pressure measurements were taken based on standardized operational procedures. Dietary adherence was done following the dietary approach to stop HTN diet. We considered heavy alcohol drinking, sedentary-level physical activity, low/medium dietary adherence and overweight/obesity as unhealthy behaviors. Participants' characteristics were compared according to the number of unhealthy behaviors and the association between HTN and unhealthy behaviors was estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 86 448 volunteer participants were included and the prevalence of HTN was of 31.1%. Of those with HTN, 8.2, 33.0, 44.3 and 14.5% exhibited 0, 1, 2 or at least 3 unhealthy behaviors, respectively. In both sexes, the prevalence of HTN increased with low/medium dietary adherence compared with high (P < 0.01), in overweight/obese compared with normal BMI (P < 0.001), with heavy alcohol consumption compared with moderate or never (P < 0.05) and with sedentary physical activity level compared to high in women only (P = 0.049). Combination of several unhealthy behaviors was associated with increased odds of HTN (P trend <0.001); men reporting 2 or at least 3 unhealthy behaviors had an adjusted odds ratio of HTN of 1.77 and 2.29, respectively, while women had an adjusted odds ratio of 1.71 and 2.14, respectively. CONCLUSION: Individual and combined unhealthy lifestyle factors were strongly associated with HTN in this large population-based study.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".