Masked and white coat hypertension, the double trouble of large arteries: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Arterial damage of large arteries, addressed as c‐f PWV, is recognized as independent predictor for future cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to systematically investigate the association of the four hypertension phenotypes with carotid‐femoral pulse wave velocity (c‐f PWV), in untreated patients. PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched to identify studies comparing c‐f PWV levels between normotensives, sustained hypertensives, white‐coat hypertensives (WCH), and masked hypertensives (MH). Meta‐analysis was performed to compare the difference c‐f PWV levels between these groups. Newcastle‐Ottawa quality assessment scale for cross‐sectional studies was used to assess study quality. MH and WCH patients had significantly increased c‐f PWV values compared to the normotensive groups ( d = 0.96 m/s, 95% CI: 0.49‐1.42; I2 = 85%, P < .01 for MH and d = 0.85 m/s, 95% CI: 0.48‐1.22; I2 = 89%, for WCH). Moreover, the sustained hypertensive population was found to have significantly increased values of c‐f PWV compared to MH ( d = −0.70 m/s, 95% CI: −0.87 to −0.54; I2 = 12%, P = .33) but not compared to WCH population ( d = −0.75 m/s, 95% CI: −1.52‐0.02; I 2 = 96%,). Finally, there was no significant difference between MH and WCH population ( d = 0.06 m/s, 95% CI: −1.04 to 1.15; I 2 = 96%,). MH and WCH population may have increased values of c‐f PWV compared to the normotensive group. These results demonstrate that these phenotypes are not clinically innocent, in the untreated population.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".