Blood Pressure Reactivity and Recovery to Anger Recall in Hypertensive Patients with Type D Personality.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Type D, otherwise known as distressed personality type, has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Blood pressure reactivity and recovery to stress could be a possible underlying pathway linking type D personality and cardiovascular events. METHODS: A total of 41 patients with hypertension were recruited from a regional hospital in southern Taiwan. Demographic and clinical characteristics were obtained from all participants. Type D personality was assessed using the 14-item Type D Scale-Taiwanese version. Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate were measured at the end of baseline, anger recall, verbal, and recovery phases of an anger recall task. Analysis of covariance was used to examine differences in blood pressure and heart rate at the anger recall, verbal, and recovery phase between patients with or without type D personality. RESULTS: After adjusting for baseline measurements, sex, and age, systolic blood pressure (p = 0.002) and diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.011) at the recovery phase were significantly higher in the patients with type D personality. No significant differences in blood pressure or heart rate were observed in the anger recall or verbal phase between the two groups of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study support the notion that prolonged blood pressure recovery rather than high reactivity could be an underlying pathway linking type D personality and the risk of future cardiovascular events among patients with 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 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".