The design of an observational study of hypertension management, adherence and pressure control in Blood Pressure Success Zone Program participants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The Blood Pressure Success Zone (BPSZ) Program, a nationwide initiative, provides education in addition to a complimentary trial of one of three antihypertensive medications. The BPSZ Longitudinal Observational Study of Success (BPSZ-BLISS) aims to evaluate blood pressure (BP) control, adherence, persistence and patient satisfaction in a representative subset of BPSZ Program participants. The BPSZ-BLISS study design is described here. METHODS: A total of 20,000 physicians were invited to participate in the study. Using a call centre supported Interactive Voice Response System (IVRS), physicians report BP and other data at enrolment and every usual care visit up to 12 +/- 2 months; subjects self-report BPs, persistence, adherence and treatment satisfaction at 3, 6 and 12 months post-BPSZ Program enrolment. In addition to BPSZ Program enrolment medications, physicians prescribe antihypertensive medications and schedule visits as per usual care. The General Electric Healthcare database will be used as an external reference. RESULTS: After 18 months, over 700 IRB approved physicians consented and enrolled 10,067 eligible subjects (48% male; mean age 56 years; 27% newly diagnosed); 97% of physicians and 78% of subjects successfully entered IVRS enrolment data. Automated IVRS validations have maintained data quality (< 5% error on key variables). Enrolment was closed 30 April 2007; study completion is scheduled for June 2008. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation of large-scale health education programmes requires innovative methodologies and data management and quality control processes. The BPSZ-BLISS design can provide insights into the conceptualisation and planning of similar studies.
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 | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".