Prevalence and Reliability of Resting and Ambulatory Inter-Arm Blood Pressure Differences in Young, Healthy Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current guidelines recommend dual-arm blood pressure measurement when screening all patients for hypertension, however the prevalence and reliability of systolic and diastolic inter-arm differences (sIADs and dIADs) are unclear in young, healthy adults. Furthermore, no study has investigated ambulatory sIADs and dIADs in this population. This study examined the prevalence and reliability of sIADs and dIADs&ge5, 10, 15, and 20mmHg, using sequential and simultaneous resting, and sequential ambulatory blood pressure measurements, in 18 healthy adults aged 20-38 years. Key findings were: First-day prevalence of resting sIADs&ge10mmHg was 5.6% (p0.05), prevalence of resting and ambulatory sIADs and dIADs decreased on a second day, and resting sIADs&ge10mmHg disappeared altogether. Further research is required to clarify the clinical relevance of these findings.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".