Resting Blood Pressure of Workers in High Stress Urban Occupations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: First responders (firefighters, paramedics, and police) working in an urban setting can be exposed to a high-stress environment caused by strenuous physical exertion, potentially dangerous work conditions, sleep deprivation due to shift work, poor dietary habits, psychological stress and noise levels that are excessive. This may induce chronic increases in blood pressure. The purpose of this study was to determine the presence of hypertension in people working in occupations generally accepted as high stress in comparison to those working in an environment where less of these obvious high stressors were present. Methods: Resting blood pressure was measured by TrUBP in 1067 on-duty first responders (fire, paramedic, and police), and in participants generally associated with a lower-stress work environment (transit workers, city and bank employees, factory workers and legislature employees). Results: The average age, systolic and diastolic blood pressures were significantly lower in those employees working in a high-stress environment than those in a low-stress job. This difference was observed in both male and female sexes. Conclusions: Our data do not support an association of high resting blood pressure values in those employed in activities typically associated with a high-stress urban working environment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".