Sex Differences in Blood Pressure Hemodynamics in Middle-Aged Adults With Overweight and Obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High blood pressure (BP) is the strongest modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Overweight/obesity is a major risk factor of high BP. Multiple sex differences exist in mechanistic pathways that increase BP in overweight/obesity. They may result in a sex-specific pattern of BP hemodynamics-males and females may vary in the relative contributions of stroke volume, total peripheral resistance (TPR), and heart rate to higher BP. We investigated this possibility in a population-based sample of middle-aged adults (36-65 years). The total sample (n=618) included 289 males and 329 females; 79% of males and 66% of females were overweight. In all, we measured BP, stroke volume, TPR, and heart rate beat-by-beat during a 52-minute protocol that included changes in posture and mental stress. We assessed the relative contributions of stroke volume, TPR, and heart rate to BP at each minute of the protocol. We observed marked sex differences in BP hemodynamics in overweight/obese individuals: the main determinant of higher BP was TPR in males (49% versus only 35% in females, P=0.008), whereas it was stroke volume in females (51% versus only 35% in males, P=0.006). These sex differences were most apparent when standing or sitting at rest. No such differences were seen in normal-weight individuals in whom the main determinant of higher BP was TPR in both sexes. Our study suggests that, in middle-aged adults, marked sex differences exist in BP hemodynamics, contributing to high BP in overweight/obese but not normal-weight individuals. As such, this study may contribute to precision medicine in hypertension.
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".