Urinary Sodium Excretion and Blood Pressure Relationship across Methods of Evaluating the Completeness of 24-h Urine Collections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared the sodium intake and systolic blood pressure (SBP) relationship from complete 24-h urine samples determined by several methods: self-reported no-missed urine, creatinine index ≥0.7, measured 24-h urine creatinine (mCER) within 25% and 15% of Kawasaki predicted urine creatinine, and sex-specific mCER ranges (mCER 15-25 mg/kg/24-h for men; 10-20 mg/kg/24-h for women). We pooled 10,031 BP and 24-h urine sodium data from 2143 participants. We implemented multilevel linear models to illustrate the shape of the sodium-BP relationship using the restricted cubic spline (RCS) plots, and to assess the difference in mean SBP for a 100 mmol increase in 24-h urine sodium. The RCS plot illustrated an initial steep positive sodium-SBP relationship for all methods, followed by a less steep positive relationship for self-reported no-missed urine, creatinine index ≥0.7, and sex-specific mCER ranges; and a plateaued relationship for the two Kawasaki methods. Each 100 mmol/24-h increase in urinary sodium was associated with 0.64 (95% CI: 0.34, 0.94) mmHg higher SBP for self-reported no-missed urine, 0.68 (95% CI: 0.27, 1.08) mmHg higher SBP for creatinine index ≥0.7, 0.87 (95% CI: 0.07, 1.67) mmHg higher SBP for mCER within 25% Kawasaki predicted urine creatinine, 0.98 (95% CI: -0.07, 2.02) mmHg change in SBP for mCER within 15% Kawasaki predicted urine creatinine, and 1.96 (95% CI: 0.93, 2.99) mmHg higher SBP for sex-specific mCER ranges. Studies examining 24-h urine sodium in relation to health outcomes will have different results based on how urine collections are deemed as complete.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".