MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

HOME BLOOD PRESSURE EDUCATIVE PROGRAMS: IMPACT ON ADULT KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICE: PP.25.01

2010· article· en· W2006360080 on OpenAlexaffabout
M Leblanc, Lyne Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDietetics, Nutrition, and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyTest (biology)Blood pressureSession (web analytics)Physical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) can improve screening and treatment of hypertension. Other benefits linked with HBPM are better therapeutic adherence, faster reach of blood pressure target value and self-care enhancement. HBPM is included in the vast majority of hypertension guidelines around the world. Patients are becoming more interested in the technique and are buying devices in large numbers. Despite clear benefits demonstrated and attraction provide by HBPM, literature is scarce when it comes to validated educational programs. Few authors have yet to demonstrate the efficacy and validity of a HPBM educational strategy. Objective: Determine the impact on adult knowledge and practice for HBPM following three different educational strategies. Design and Method: A pre test post test design was chosen. Adult workers from a French Canadian University having never received formal teaching on HBPM were included. Participants were randomly assigned to three different educational strategies following Canadian hypertension educational program; individual session, group session or self-learning with a booklet. Knowledge was assessed with a questionnaire while skills were evaluated with an observational grid. Results: Sixty participants were included. Analysis shows that individual, group sessions and self learning strategy improve knowledge significantly with greater post test scores (38%, 54% and 45% vs up 97%, 99% and 90% respectively, p < 0,001). Individual and group sessions were more effective than a self-learning strategy (p = 0,01). As for skills development, individual and group sessions are clearly more effective than self-learning module as shown with post test scores: 74%, 79% and 53% respectively (p = 0,01). Conclusions: This study has demonstrated that different strategies can be used effectively to teach adults how to measure their blood pressure. Notwithstanding this, the interaction with an educator has proven beneficial, especially regarding skills acquisition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.003

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicDietetics, Nutrition, and EducationFrench-language works237,207