Public knowledge and awareness of cardiovascular disease and its risk factors: a cross-sectional study of 1000 Jordanians
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of the current knowledge and understanding of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among Jordan's general public, their behaviour towards CVD and the factors associated with different CVD knowledge levels. METHODS: The data in the present study were collected using an interview-administered questionnaire. One thousand members of the general public were interviewed face to face. CVD knowledge was computed as a continuous variable. KEY FINDINGS: The present study reports limited public knowledge and awareness of CVD. Participants were more likely to have better CVD knowledge scores if they were non-smokers, always or often paid attention to their diet, reported having an 'about right' weight, occupied a very high socioeconomic level, held a university degree and had positive family history of CVD. Participants indicated that the community pharmacists had to play a role in helping patients manage their prescribed medicines; however, they did not recognise the community pharmacists' role in other areas of CVD prevention and management. CONCLUSION: The present study reports that the general public in Jordan has limited knowledge and awareness of CVD. In planning to positively impact CVD prevention and management, community pharmacists must develop and promote effective and accessible services.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it