Identifying patients with hypertension using ABPM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of the systematic identification and sustained follow-up protocol of hypertensive patients using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) superimposed on Phase III cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Methods: Patients with elevated blood pressure (BP) (clinic measurement) on entry to CR had protocol cycles of ABPM, lifestyle education, medication changes and clinic BP monitoring, throughout CR and up to 6 months follow-up until BP control was achieved. Results: Initial assessment using clinic measurement identified 30% (129) patients with uncontrolled hypertension but following initial ABPM 62% (n=80) were normal with 38% (49) diagnosed as uncontrolled. These were followed-up using protocol cycles up to six times. Of those originally identified as hypertensive, 81% (104) achieved control. Conclusion: This systematic identification and sustained follow-up of hypertensive patients using ABPM in CR was a convenient, successful method in identifying and controlling a significant amount of uncontrolled hypertension.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".