Rationale and Design for the LOnger-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 INfection on blood Vessels And blood pRessure (LOCHINVAR): an observational phenotyping study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 may lead to long-term endothelial consequences including hypertension, stroke and myocardial infarction. A pilot study 'COVID-19 blood pressure endothelium interaction study', which found that patients with normal blood pressure (BP) at the time of hospital admission with COVID-19 showed an 8.6 mm Hg higher BP ≥12 weeks after recovery, compared with a group without COVID-19. The 'LOnger-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 INfection on blood Vessels And blood pRessure'(LOCHINVAR) study is designed to provide definitive evidence of the long-term impact of COVID-19 on BP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The LOCHINVAR study is an observational clinical phenotyping study comparing longitudinal BP change between individuals with and without COVID-19 infection. 150 participants (30-60 years) with no history of hypertension and not on BP lowering medications will be recruited to the study to attend three visits (baseline, 12 months, 18 months). Cases will be patients who were admitted to the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (QEUH), Glasgow, UK, with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 until 31 December 2021 and who were alive at discharge. Controls will be those who have never had confirmed COVID-19 infection. All participants will undergo clinical and vascular phenotyping studies which will include 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring systolic BP (ABPM SBP), brachial flow-mediated dilatation urine and blood samples to assess the renin-angiotensin system, vascular inflammation and immune status. The primary outcome is the change in systolic 24-hour ABPM (ABPM SBP) between the cases and controls. Sample size was calculated to detect a mean difference of 5 mm Hg ABPM SBP at 80% power. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol of this study has been approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 5 (21/WS/0075), Scotland, UK. Written informed consent will be provided by all study participants. Study findings will be submitted to international peer-reviewed hypertension journals and will be presented at international scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05087290.
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 | 0.128 | 0.080 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".