Urinary Sodium and Potassium and Blood Pressure in African and US Cohorts With CKD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Higher dietary sodium (Na) and lower potassium (K) are associated with increased blood pressure and cardiovascular disease risk. In individuals with CKD, there are conflicting results on the associations of dietary Na and K with kidney function. We examined associations of 24hr-urine Na and K, with systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) and pulse pressure (PP) in Africans and Americans with CKD. Methods: We analyzed 619 participants enrolled in an ancillary study to the Human Hereditary and Health in Africa Kidney Disease Network. Calibrated log transformed 24-hr urinary sodium (UNa), potassium (UK) and sodium/potassium ratio (UNa/UK) were analyzed centrally. Using generalized linear regression with a random intercept for clinical center, we calculated crude and adjusted (adjusting for covariates) β coefficients and 95% CI with each blood pressure parameter. Similar cross-sectional analyses were performed in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (n=3459). Results: Median UNa excretion was lower in West Africans vs Americans [134 (104-175) vs. 160 (118-215) mmol/24hr, p <0.001]. Median UK excretion was lower in West Africans vs Americans [36 (28-48) vs 55 (40-74) mmol/24hr (p <0.001)]. Higher UNa excretion was associated with higher SBP in both cohorts (Fig 1). Higher UK was associated with lower SBP, and significantly associated with lower DBP in both cohorts. Conclusions: Cross-sectionally, higher urinary Na excretion, lower urinary K excretion and higher Na/K ratio are associated with higher blood pressure and is consistent among West Africans and Americans with CKD. Funding: NIDDK Supportβ Coefficients and 95% CI of UNa and K and Blood pressure
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".