MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

NON-INVASIVE CENTRAL BLOOD PRESSURE ESTIMATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH OR WITHOUT CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE: A PILOT PROJET

2022· article· en· W4282842074 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nadège Côté, Yasmine Abbaoui, Théo Spanneut, Mohsen Agharazii, Rémi Goupil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de QuébecCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSupine positionBlood pressureKidney diseaseCardiologyInternal medicineContext (archaeology)Aortic pressureAortaHemodynamicsCuffPulse pressureSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Central systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a better surrogate for hemodynamic strain on the myocardium, brain and kidneys. In the context of chronic kidney disease (CKD), where the blood flow to the kidneys is reduced and there is a higher degree of aortic stiffness, estimation of central BP through non-invasive methods needs to be validated. The aim of our study is to determine the accuracy of brachial and central SBP, as measured and estimated by two devices, towards the invasively measured aortic BP, in CKD patients compared to patients without CKD. Design and method: This is a multicenter pilot study taking place at the hospitals Hotel-Dieu de Québec and Sacré-Coeur de Montréal. Patients undergoing non-urgent coronary angiograms are undergoing evaluation of non-invasive and invasive BPs simultaneously in supine position. In brief, intraarterial aortic BPs are recorded in the aorta within 3 cm of the aortic valve for every heartbeat for 30 seconds then averaged. Non-invasive central and brachial BP measures are recorded concurrently to the intraarterial aortic BP recordings with WatchBP central and Mobil-o-graph. All measurements are recorded on the contralateral arm used for angiography. Results: In 34 subjects (29% female, mean age 64.2 ± 8.7). In the CKD group (n = 8, eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73m2) and the control group (n = 26, eGFR> 30 ml/min/1.73m2). Brachial cuff-SBP underestimated aortic SBP in CKD (-10.0 ± 19.6 mmHg) but overestimated aortic SBP (3.9 ± 16.3 mm Hg) in the control group. Mobil-o-graph estimations are more precise than the brachial BP in CKD (0.0 ± 10.1 mmHg) but not in the control group (6.5 ± 14.7 mmHg). WatchBP Central SBP estimations are also more precise than the brachial BP in CKD (1.2 ± 10.8) but overestimated aortic SBP in the control group (13.4 ± 18.9). Conclusions: The preliminary results indicate that brachial SBP underestimates aortic SBP by in CKD as compared to controls, and that estimation of central BP by both devices provide a better estimate of aortic SBP in CKD than in controls. These preliminary results suggest that the use of central BP estimations could be beneficial for the management of hypertension in CKD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207