Circulating endothelial cell derived microvesicles are elevated with hypertension and associated with endothelial dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine (1) if circulating endothelial microvesicles (EMVs) are elevated in hypertensive adults and (2) whether circulating EMVs are associated with hypertension-related endothelial vasodilator dysfunction. Circulating EMVs (CD31+/42b–) were determined in 30 middle-aged adults (55 ± 1 years): 15 normotensive (10 males, 5 females; blood pressure 114/71 ± 2/1 mm Hg) and 15 hypertensive (10 males, 5 females; blood pressure 142/87 ± 2/2 mm Hg). Forearm blood flow (FBF) (via plethysmography) was assessed by intra-arterial infusion of acetylcholine and sodium nitroprusside. Circulating EMVs were ∼65% higher (P < 0.05) in hypertensive (157 ± 10 EMVs/μL) than in normotensive (96 ± 10 EMVs/μL) adults. FBF to acetylcholine was significantly lower (∼30%) in the hypertensive group (from 5.0 ± 0.4 to 11.8 ± 0.8 mL·100 mL tissue–1·min–1 versus from 4.4 ± 0.2 to 15.6 ± 0.8 mL·100 mL tissue–1·min–1). Circulating EMVs were inversely associated with vasodilation (r = –0.65; P < 0.05). Hypertension is associated with elevated circulating levels of EMVs. EMVs may serve as a biomarker of, and contribute to, blood pressure related endothelial dysfunction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".