MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107718970 · doi:10.3390/ijerph17238892

The Night Side of Blood Pressure: Nocturnal Blood Pressure Dipping and Emotional (dys)Regulation

2020· article· en· W3107718970 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Casagrande, Francesca Favieri, Viviana Langher, Angela Guarino, Enrico Di Pace, Giuseppe Germanò, Giuseppe Forte

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNocturnalBlood pressureMedicinePsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The dipping phenomenon is a physiological drop in blood pressure (around 10–20%) during sleep and represents an event related to the circadian blood pressure trend. This phenomenon, in some cases, is characterized by some alterations that can be expressed by an increase (extreme dipping), a decrease (non-dipping), or a reverse (i.e., higher blood pressure during sleep compared to awake state; reverse-dipping) physiological decline of blood pressure. Few studies focused on the association between the circadian variation of blood pressure and psychological variables, although this information could help understanding how psychological characteristics (e.g., emotional regulation or dysregulation) interact with individuals’ physiological processes. Given the association between emotional dysregulation and essential hypertension, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between alexithymia and dipping status in a sample of healthy and hypertensive adults in the absence of other medical conditions. Methods: Two hundred and ten adults took part in the study and were classified, according to ambulatorial blood pressure measure (ABPM), into three groups: dippers (n = 70), non-dippers (n = 70), and extreme dippers (n = 70). The participants completed a socio-demographic and anamnestic interview and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20). Results: The ANOVAs on the TAS-20 subscales showed that the groups differed in the difficulty identifying feelings and difficulty describing feelings. In both the subscales, dippers showed lower scores than non-dippers and extreme dippers. The ANOVA on the global score of TAS-20 confirmed that dippers were less alexithymic than both extreme dippers and non-dippers. Conclusions: This study confirms that some psychological factors, like alexithymia, could represent a characteristic of patients who fail to exhibit an adaptive dipping phenomenon. Moreover, an association between an excessive reduction of BP (extreme dipping) or a lack of the decrease of BP during sleep (non-dipping) and a worse emotional regulation, considering alexithymia construct, was highlighted for the first time, confirming the relevant role of the emotional process in the modulation of an essential psychophysiological process such as the circadian variation of BP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207