Eligibility to treatment and economic effect of the implementation of the new US or European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology hypertension guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the population and economic impact of implementing the new Joint National Committee (JNC) or European Society of Hypertension (ESH)/European Society of Cardiology (ESC) hypertension guidelines in the Swiss population. METHODS: Cross-sectional, population-based sample (6708 participants) collected between 2003 and 2006 in the city of Lausanne, Switzerland. Blood pressure categories were defined according to both the JNC (JNC-7 and JNC-8) and the ESH/ESC (2007 and 2013) guidelines. RESULTS: The proportion of participants aged 35-60 years eligible for drug treatment was 25.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.4-26.9%] and 24.8% (95% CI 23.6-26.0%) for the JNC-7 and the JNC-8 guidelines, respectively; for participants aged 60-75 years, the values were 62.3% (95% CI 60.1-64.5%) and 46.8% (95% CI 44.5-49.0%), respectively. Shifting from the JNC-7 to the JNC-8 guidelines would lead to an annual saving of 163.6 million Swiss francs (187.7 million US dollars or 134.5 million European €). The proportion of participants aged 35-75 years without chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus or reported history of cardiovascular disease and eligible for treatment was 30.2% (95% CI 29.0-31.4%) for the ESH/ESC 2007 and 2013 guidelines. For participants with chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus or reported history of cardiovascular disease, the values were 73.6% (95% CI 70.8-76.3%) and 55.6% (95% CI 52.5-58.8%), respectively. Shifting from the ESH/ESC 2007 to the ESH/ESC 2013 guidelines would lead to an annual saving of 86.9 million Swiss francs (99.5 million US dollars or 71.4 million European €). CONCLUSION: In Switzerland, shifting from the JNC-7 to the JNC-8 guidelines or from the ESH/ESC 2007 to the ESH/ESC 2013 guidelines would decrease the prevalence of patients eligible for treatment and increase the percentage of treated patients within blood pressure goals. Both strategies lead to potential savings in antihypertensive drug treatment.
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 | 0.006 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".