Sex Differences in Ambulatory Blood Pressure Levels and Subtypes in a Large Italian Community Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sex differences in blood pressure control are recognized. We systematically investigated sex differences in specific components of ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), including variability, day-night changes, morning surge, and hypertension types. Methods: We analyzed ABPs of 52 911 participants (45.6% male, 54.4% female, 37.0% treated for hypertension) visiting 860 Italian community pharmacies. Sex differences in ABP levels and patterns were evaluated in the whole group and 4 risk groups (antihypertensive-treated patients, patients with diabetes, dyslipidemia, or cardiovascular disease). Results: Average 24-hour, day-time, and night-time blood pressure values were consistently higher in males than females ( P <0.001). Variability in ABP was higher in females, except during the night. Nondippers and an abnormal morning surge were more common among males (odds ratio and 95% CI, 1.282 [1.230–1.335] and 1.244 [1.159–1.335]; P <0.001). The prevalence of 24-hour and masked hypertension was higher in males (odds ratio and 95% CI, 2.093 [2.019–2.170] and 1.347 [1.283–1.415]; P <0.001) and that of white-coat hypertension in females (0.719 [0.684–0.755]; P <0.001). Ambulatory heart rate mean values were higher ( P <0.001) in females. Day-time HR variability was higher and night-time heart rate variability lower in females ( P <0.001). Sex differences in ABP levels and patterns detected in the whole population were replicated in all risk groups, except for the prevalence of abnormal morning surge (between sexes difference in antihypertensive-treated participants only). Conclusions: Females show better ABP control than males, but with an increased blood pressure variability and a greater prevalence of white-coat hypertension. These findings support tailored management of hypertension. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03781401
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".