Differences in hypertension between informal and formal areas of Ouagadougou, a sub-Saharan African city
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Countries of sub-Saharan Africa are increasingly confronted with hypertension and urbanization is considered to favor its emergence. This study aims to assess the difference in the prevalence of hypertension between formal and informal urban areas of Ouagadougou and to determine the risk factors associated with hypertension in these urban populations of sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2010 on 2041 adults aged 18 years and older in formal and informal areas of Ouagadougou. Data was collected through personal interviews conducted at home. Blood pressure and anthropometric measurements were taken by trained interviewers. Logistic regressions were fitted to identify factors associated with hypertension. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of hypertension was 18.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.9-20.3) and its detection was 27.4% (95% CI, 22.9-31.9). Prevalence of hypertension in formal settings was 21.4% (95% CI, 19.0-23.8), significantly higher than prevalence in informal settings: 15.3% (95% CI, 13.0-17.6). However, this difference disappeared after adjusting for age. In addition to age, being an unmarried woman (odds ratio [OR] = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4), recent rural-to-urban migration (OR = 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.8), obesity (OR = 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-3.1) and physical inactivity (OR = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0), were independent risk factors for hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension is common among the adult population of Ouagadougou but its detection is low. While there are no differences between formal and informal areas of the city, rural-to-urban migration emerges as an independent risk factor. Known risk factors as obesity and physical inactivity are confirmed while the vulnerability of unmarried women and rural-to-urban migrants maybe specific to this west African population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".