Epigenetic Changes Related to Hypertension in Asian Adults: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Elevated high blood pressure is controlled by complicated, little-understood genetic and epigenetic pathways that are influenced by both heritable and environmental variables. Many adult systolic and diastolic blood pressure-related genomic loci have been identified through previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS); meanwhile, studies specifically on Asian adult populations have not been done. This study aims to comprehensively assess and summarize any gene changes that have been studied and see whether there is a possible influence between epigenetic changes and hypertension in Asian adults. Methods: This evidence-based analysis is based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement and has been registered in PROSPERO under registration number [CRD42024622261]. The data were processed qualitatively to assess the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Agency for Health Research and Quality (AHRQ) standards as the threshold. Our study in particular shows that epigenetic modifications may play a role in hypertension, particularly in Asian individuals. Results: A total of 28 studies were selected for qualitative evaluation. In the adult Asian population, 26 publications (92.8%) reported a relationship between blood pressure and epigenetics. Every study describes a distinct gene or location associated with hypo- or hypermethylation. Elevated systolic and diastolic blood pressure was linked to variations of several single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), cytosine phosphate guanines (CPGs), and other monogenic genes. Conclusion: CRD42024622261.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".