MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020738515 · doi:10.2147/ppa.s55382

Proportion and risk indicators of nonadherence to antihypertensive therapy: a meta-analysis

2014· article· en· W2020738515 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient Preference and Adherence · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedication Adherence and Compliance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyInternal medicineAntihypertensive drugConfidence intervalBlood pressureMeta-analysisAngiotensin Receptor BlockersDiabetes mellitusPharmacotherapyCombination therapyIntensive care medicineAngiotensin-converting enzymeEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The World Health Organization (WHO) concluded that poor adherence to treatment is the most important cause of uncontrolled high blood pressure, with approximately 75% of patients not achieving optimum blood pressure control. The WHO estimates that between 20% and 80% of patients receiving treatment for hypertension are adherent. As such, the first objective of our study was to quantify the proportion of nonadherence to antihypertensive therapy in real-world observational study settings. The second objective was to provide estimates of independent risk indicators associated with nonadherence to antihypertensive therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of all studies published between database inception and December 31, 2011 that reviewed adherence, and risk indicators associated with nonadherence, to antihypertensive medications. RESULTS: In the end, 26 studies met our inclusion and exclusion criteria and passed our methodological quality evaluation. Of the 26 studies, 48.5% (95% confidence interval 47.7%-49.2%) of patients were adherent to antihypertensive medications at 1 year of follow-up. The associations between 114 variables and nonadherence to antihypertensive medications were reviewed. After meta-analysis, nine variables were associated with nonadherence to antihypertensive medications: diuretics in comparison to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and calcium channel blockers (CCBs), ACE inhibitors in comparison to ARBs, CCBs in comparison to ARBs, those with depression or using antidepressants, not having diabetes, lower income status, and minority cultural status. CONCLUSION: This study clarifies the extent of adherence along with determining nine independent risk indicators associated with nonadherence to antihypertensive medications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.195 · 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