MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117430402 · doi:10.64898/2025.12.17.25342472

Blood Pressure Variability in Daily Life: Comparing Individuals with Cervical and Upper-Thoracic Spinal Cord Injury to Non-Injured Controls

2025· article· W7117430402 on OpenAlexafffund
Shane J. T. Balthazaar, Matthias Walter, Catherine R. Jutzeler, Andrea Maharaj, Andrei V. Krassioukov, Tom E Nightingale

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal HealthInternational Collaboration On Repair Discoveries
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungInternational Foundation for Research in ParaplegiaRick Hansen FoundationMichael Smith Health Research BCPfizerNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBlood pressureNocturnalSpinal cord injuryAmbulatory blood pressureAmbulatoryCircadian rhythmHeart rate variability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Spinal cord injury (SCI) above the sixth thoracic spinal cord segment can disrupt autonomic cardiovascular control, leading to increased BP variability (BPV). This study compared BPV, nocturnal dipping patterns, and blood pressure (BP) fluctuations among individuals with cervical SCI (C-SCI), upper-thoracic SCI (UT-SCI), and non-injured controls (NI-C). Methods Using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, we analyzed BPV (via standard deviation [SD], coefficient of variation [CoV], average real variability [ARV], and variability independent of the mean [VIM]), nocturnal dipping, and systolic/diastolic BP fluctuations. Nocturnal dipping percentages were calculated and patterns classified. Hypotensive (SBP <100mmHg, DBP <70mmHg) and hypertensive (SBP >150mmHg per clinical guideline thresholds) events were identified. BP distribution was analyzed using skewness and kurtosis. Results Eighty participants (44 C-SCI, 19 UT-SCI, 17 NI-C) had 66 ± 18 measurements taken and are included in the analysis. The C-SCI group exhibited significantly higher systolic BPV metrics across SD, CoV, ARV, and VIM compared to the UT-SCI and NI-C groups ( P < 0.01). C-SCI nocturnal BP dips were reduced, and reverse dipping patterns were more prevalent ( P < 0.001). Hypotensive events occurred more frequently in C-SCI and UT-SCI compared to NI-C (both P < 0.001). SCI groups, particularly those with C-SCI, showed significantly more right-skewed SBP distributions and a higher proportion of non-Gaussian BP profiles, suggesting increased BP lability. Conclusion Individuals with C-SCI showed significantly increased BPV and impaired nocturnal dipping, while both C-SCI and UT-SCI demonstrated heightened susceptibility to hypotensive events. These findings highlight the need for targeted cardiovascular monitoring and interventions in individuals with C-SCI and UT-SCI to mitigate the known risks associated with BP dysregulation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207