MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2963175500

The necessity of the patient sitting alone in silence for the measurement of blood pressure using a BpTRU device

2019· dissertation· en· W2963175500 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Douglas Morrison Tulloch Dorward

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health Research
KeywordsBlood pressureConversationSittingContext (archaeology)MedicineSilenceDiastoleStethoscopeCardiologyRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePhysical therapyPsychologyCommunicationPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context: While previous studies have demonstrated an increase in blood pressure when measured while talking, the effect of conversation on the measurement of blood pressure using a BpTRU device is unknown. Objective: In adults who have their blood pressure measured using a BpTRU device in the primary care setting, does the presence of a healthcare professional engaging the patient in conversation during the measurement period affect the recorded blood pressure compared to the patient being alone in a private room and silent during the measurement period? Design: An assessment of two approaches of measuring blood pressure using a BpTRU device in which participants serve as their own control and the order of testing is randomized. Participants: Adults (n=272) aged ≥ 19 years recruited from an academic family practice unit in St. John’s NL. Intervention: Participant’s blood pressure was measured twice using a BpTRU device, once while alone in a quiet room maintaining silence and once while engaging in a health-related conversation. Whether blood pressure was measured first during conversation or during silence was randomized. Outcome Measures: Systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and the mean difference in systolic and diastolic blood pressures between talking and silent measurement conditions. Results: Mean systolic blood pressure was 9 mmHg higher (95% CI 8.2 – 10.5) and mean diastolic blood pressure was 8 mmHg higher (95% CI 7.6 – 8.9) when measured during conversation compared to when measured in silence. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure measured during conversation remained significantly higher after controlling for all other variables in multiple linear regression analysis. Conclusion: To avoid inaccurate measurement of blood pressure which could result in the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of hypertension, blood pressure measurement with the BpTRU device should be conducted with patients alone and in silence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)→Same topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies→French-language works237,207→