Blood Pressure Discrepancy and Pulse Differential in Patients Undergoing CT Angiography for Suspected Acute Aortic Dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To determine if blood pressure discrepancy between arms, pulse pressure, or other patient characteristics are more common in patients diagnosed with acute aortic dissection than those without, as confirmed on computed tomography angiography. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted for patients who had undergone CTA for possible acute aortic dissection in Newfoundland and Labrador from 2012-2019. Each CTA-positive participant was sex, age (+/- 2 years), and technology-matched with CTA-negative controls. Results: 61 participants met all inclusion criteria. Blood pressure discrepancy was not significant between acute aortic dissection types or between genders, with no impact on mortality rates. Pulse pressure was significantly higher in Stanford Type B aortic dissection (STB) than Stanford Type A Aortic Dissections (STA). Lower pulse pressures had lower mortality rates for STB respondents only. Abdominal pain was more frequent in STB than STA. Females with abdominal pain or back pain had increased mortality rates. Syncope was more common in STA than STB. Males with syncope had increased mortality rates. STA males had significantly increased mortality, while STB males had decreased mortality across all time points. Conclusion: This was the first study to compare blood pressure differentials and pulse pressures together in conjunction with age-, sex- , and technology-matched controls, and the first to break these findings down further by AAD type and sex. Our findings demonstrate previously unidentified symptom- and sex-specific factors which could be invaluable in initial assessment and triage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".