Bibliographic record
Abstract
As of this first issue of January 2021 of The American Journal of Hypertension, we will provide a summary of the articles published in the issue. This issue brings to the reader two in depth reviews, one on immune mechanisms and kidney injury in salt-sensitive hypertension,1 and one on inflammation, immunity, and aldosterone in hypertension.2 It includes a number of original reports that go from a brief communication on the retina in malignant hypertension3 through primary aldosteronism,4 heart disease and association with metabolic and inflammatory biomarkers,5 premature mortality among Japanese in relation to stages in the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline for management of hypertension,6 uric acid and its association with blood pressure (BP) phenotypes and target organ damage,7 preeclampsia and the role of vascular endothelial growth receptor 2 on blood–brain barrier permeability,8 maternal hypertension-related genotypes and congenital heart defects,9 the rationale and design of a genotype-guided hypertension trial,10 the pancreatic microcirculation and progression of hypertension in spontaneously hypertensive rats,11 role of Trpa1 in renal ischemia-reperfusion injury with classical activation of macrophages,12 and finally, a Hypertension Rounds in which a case of late detection of pheochromocytoma in a young patient with resistant hypertension and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is discussed.13
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.054 |
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".