Control of blood pressure in older patients with heart failure and the risk of mortality: a population-based prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: treatment goals for blood pressure (BP) lowering in older patients with heart failure (HF) are unclear. OBJECTIVE: to assess whether BP control < 140/90 mmHg is associated with a decreased risk of mortality in older HF patients. DESIGN: population-based prospective cohort study. SETTING/SUBJECTS: participants of the Berlin Initiative Study, a prospective cohort of community-dwelling older adults launched in 2009. Clinical information was obtained in face-to-face interviews and linked to administrative healthcare data. METHODS: Cox proportional hazards models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality associated with normalised BP (systolic BP < 140 mmHg and diastolic BP < 90 mmHg) compared with non-normalised BP (systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg) in HF patients. The primary analysis considered only baseline BP ('time-fixed'); an additional analysis updated BP during follow-up ('time-dependent'). RESULTS: at baseline, 544 patients were diagnosed with HF and treated with antihypertensive drugs (mean age 82.8 years; 45.4% female). During a median follow-up of 7.5 years and compared with non-normalised BP, normalised BP was associated with similar risks of cardiovascular death (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.84-1.85) and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.89-1.51) in the time-fixed analysis but with increased risks of cardiovascular death (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.23-2.61) and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.15-1.90) in the time-dependent analysis. CONCLUSIONS: BP control < 140/90 mmHg was not associated with a decreased risk of mortality in older HF patients. The increased risk in the time-dependent analysis requires further corroboration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".