MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Blood pressure measurement and the guidelines: a proposed new algorithm for the diagnosis of hypertension

2004· review· en· W1991932874 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Pressure Monitoring · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWomen's College HospitalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSphygmomanometerBlood pressureAmbulatory blood pressureAmbulatoryMercury (programming language)Medical emergencyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current hypertension guidelines continue to base management decisions on the office BP as recorded by mercury sphygmomanometry. The imminent disappearance of mercury from the workplace for environmental and safety reasons provides an opportunity to re-assess how a diagnosis of hypertension is made. There are now several validated, automated BP recording devices available to replace mercury sphygmomanometers in the office setting. Self/home and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring should now become an integral part of the diagnostic algorithm for hypertension in view of their superior ability to predict clinical outcomes when compared to traditional office BP measurements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.161 · 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