Pharmacotherapy of Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hypertension is a leading risk factor for death and disability in Canada. Pharmacists can help to improve the treatment and control of hypertension through collaboration with physicians and patients to improve pharmacotherapy. Objective: To review appropriate pharmacotherapy for hypertension, as outlined in the recommendations of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program. Methods: The recommendations of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program were reviewed with a view to identifying gaps in the recommendations as they apply to pharmacy practice. For some of these gaps, it was determined that pharmacists could provide further care to patients with hypertension, and opportunities for pharmacist involvement are suggested here. Results: Initial pharmacotherapy for uncomplicated hypertension includes thiazide-type diuretics, beta-blockers for patients under 60 years of age, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, long-acting calcium channel blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers. For additive hypotensive action in two-drug combinations, either a diuretic or a calcium channel blocker should be combined with a beta-blocker, ACE inhibitor, or angiotensin receptor blocker. Other combinations are less effective or unproven. Areas where pharmacists must become more actively involved in the management of patients with hypertension include provision of balanced information about benefits and side effects, identification of secondary druginduced causes of hypertension or drug interactions, and suggestion of adjustments to medication dosage for patients with renal dysfunction. Conclusions: There are specific and unique roles for pharmacists in the management of hypertension. Pharmacists can play a greater role in improving the pharmacological management of hypertensive patients, aided in part by regular updates to the recommendations of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".