Definitions for hypertensive response to exercise: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hypertension (HT) is a leading modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but resting blood pressure (BP) measurements often miss hypertensive episodes during daily activities, affecting 10-15% of adults. A hypertensive response to exercise (HRE), characterized by abnormally high systolic BP (SBP) increases, is associated with future arterial HT and cardiovascular events, even in normotensive individuals and athletes. Despite its clinical significance, definitions of HRE vary widely, leading to inconsistent incidence estimates. The aim of this study was to collect available values of HRE and investigate definitions for HRE. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines, conducting a comprehensive search of MEDLINE and Embase from 1974 to 2024. The search included studies on normotensive adults and athletes with or without HRE, focusing on BP cutoffs across exercise modalities and intensities. Eligible study designs included original research studies of any design, while reviews, case reports, and meta-analyses were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis involved multiple reviewers to ensure accuracy, with results presented in narrative and tabular formats. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 25 studies with 15,391 participants (weighted mean age 50 years, 28.3% female, 5.4% athletes) were analyzed, encompassing various study designs, including cross-sectional, case-control, cohort, and longitudinal studies. Exercise test protocols included treadmill (14 studies), bicycle ergometry (seven), shuttle/runs (three), and hand-grip strength (one), with most studies utilizing peak exercise intensities and automated BP measurements. Cut-offs for HRE varied, with most studies using SBP thresholds of ≥210 mmHg for men and ≥190 mmHg for women, though some studies proposed higher thresholds or included diastolic BP criteria. Definitions and methodologies for HRE were heterogeneous, reflecting variability across studies. Age, sex, fitness level, and test protocols significantly influence BP response, yet these factors are mostly omitted in the definition of HRE, with older adults and postmenopausal women showing exaggerated responses. Athletes exhibit higher peak SBP during exercise due to increased peak exercise cardiac output and augmented muscular strength enabling the athletes to push peak SBP higher, but thresholds applied are often the same as for non-athletes, underscoring the need for fitness-specific cut-offs. Variations in test protocols, measurement methods, and reliance on legacy cut-offs, which have been reproduced over decades further complicate consensus on standardized thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized, phenotype-specific criteria are essential to improve diagnostic accuracy and guide clinical recommendations in HRE.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | low |
| gpt | Meta-epidemiology (broad) Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".