COMPARISON OF WHITE COAT AND MASKED HYPERTENSION IN AN OUTPATIENT CARDIOLOGY POPULATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective: White coat hypertension and masked hypertension are two diagnoses that have opposite defining characteristics. White coat hypertension is defined as having an abnormally elevated blood pressure reading at the doctor's office however it is normal otherwise. Masked hypertension is defined as having a normal blood pressure reading in office while being hypertensive otherwise. White coat hypertension is well understood to be provoked by anxiety and stress when visiting a doctor's office. Masked hypertension is frequently under-diagnosed as patients with normal blood pressure readings likely do not have further investigations where masked hypertension can be identified. According to current literature, masked hypertension can be present in as much as 20% of the population. This study analyzes a sample of patients in an outpatient setting to determine the prevalence of such conditions in a typical Canadian population. Design and method: 500 patients from a single outpatient cardiology practice were screened with a 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor and results were analyzed the following day. Patients were diagnosed as having masked hypertension, white coat effect/hypertension or having normal blood pressures. Results: Of the 500 patients analyzed, 6.2% of the cohort was diagnosed as having masked hypertension. 23.6% of the cohort was diagnosed as having white coat effect. 60% of the screened patients were normotensive whereas the remaining 40% had some degree of hypertension, including masked hypertension. Conclusions: The data obtained from the analysis shows that in this typical segment of Canadian population, the diagnosis of masked hypertension is well below the current expected prevalence for this condition. This is noted as only 6% of the population was diagnosed as having masked hypertension. Almost 1/4 of the patients were appropriately shown to have white coat effect on their blood pressure recordings. The majority of the patients were identified as having normal blood pressure. The data suggests that masked hypertension may not be as significant a condition as previously suspected. White coat hypertension is especially prevalent and should be followed up on as white coat hypertension can sometimes turn into permanent 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".