Gender Differences in the Role of Social Support for Hypertension Prevention in Canada: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between social support and hypertension is poorly understood in women and men. We investigated whether multiple measures of social support are linked to blood pressure levels differentially by gender. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 28,779 middle-age and older-age adults (45-85 years) in the baseline Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging comprehensive cohort. Stratified multivariable regression models estimated the role and relative contribution of 4 types of support to blood pressure in women and men. RESULTS: The highest levels of perceived availability of informational, tangible, emotional, and belonging support were significantly associated with the lowest mean level of systolic blood pressure (SBP) but not diastolic blood pressure, independent of known confounders and other support types. However, associations were small, and their directions were more consistent in women. The lowest levels of informational support, relative to the highest, were associated with higher odds of hypertension in women (odds ratio [OR] = 1.20 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.06, 1.36]), more so than in men (OR = 1.16 [95% CI: 1.03, 1.32]). The lowest levels of emotional support were similarly associated with the odds of hypertension (OR = 1.08 [95% CI: 1.00, 1.17] in women and OR = 1.08 [95% CI: 1.00, 1.15] in men), relative to the highest. Larger differences in mean SBP in women, compared with men, were seen for informational support (2.43 and 1.18 mm Hg, respectively) and emotional support (1.60 and 0.74 mm Hg, respectively). Findings were unaltered by sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Informational and emotional support were inversely associated with SBP, more so in women than men. Further longitudinal investigation is warranted, as results suggest that specific supports may help prevent hypertension and lower cardiovascular risk, especially in women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".