Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The most recent country-wide Canadian data have revealed that only 33% of people with hypertension take medication and fewer than half of them have their blood pressure under control. One of the most important reasons for difficulty in controlling blood pressure is lack of drug treatment compliance. In addition, media coverage of health facts has an impact on beliefs, attitudes and behaviours related to health. Our goal was to analyze newspaper coverage of drugs related to hypertension. Method: We conducted a thematic content analysis of newspapers covering medications related to hypertension. The study comprised 104 articles drawn from three of the most important francophone daily newspapers in Canada – a reference one, a general broadsheet and a tabloid. Results: We identified three major themes:1) drugs as an effective treatment, 2) specific problematic cases, and 3) problems with the pharmacological approach in general. We noted a gradual change from positive to negative as we moved from the most serious newspaper to the most popular. We discuss the Fiske hypothesis which suggests that tabloid-format newspapers are a repository of popular opposition to the discourse of groups who hold power in society. Conclusion: In the tabloid, the most widely-read newspaper in Quebec, medications are often presented in negative fashion in articles on hypertension. However, further studies are required to determine if there is a causal association between media discourse and the phenomenon of lack of drug treatment compliance. Key words: Hypertension; medications; prescription drugs; compliance; media; newspapers
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".