MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of a social marketing media campaign on public awareness of hypertension

2005· article· en· W2048745540 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Robert J. Petrella, Mark Speechley, Peter Kleinstiver, Terrence D. Ruddy

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Hypertension · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaSt Joseph's Health CentreWestern University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineSocial marketingSocial mediaAdvertisingPublic relationsMarketingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Barriers to high blood pressure (BP) awareness and control are exacerbated by poor knowledge of the consequences and uncertainty regarding how to and who should direct care. We developed a social marketing hypertension awareness program to determine baseline awareness, knowledge, and treatment behavior, and then studied the impact of a targeted, media intervention among randomly surveyed adults at risk in a representative urban community compared to a control community immediately and 6 months after the intervention. METHODS: The program consisted of three random-digit telephone surveys conducted in two mid-sized Ontario cities to determine high BP awareness, knowledge, and treatment behavior. Using baseline knowledge and attitudes toward high BP in both communities, a social marketing awareness strategy and mass media intervention campaign incorporating television, radio, print, direct to patient, and interactive techniques was developed and implemented in the test city only. Both test and control cities were resurveyed immediately after and at 6 months post-media intervention to detect change and decay. RESULTS: A sample of 6873 men and women more than 35 years old who were aware of their high BP demonstrated a high prevalence of high BP in the general population ( approximately 34% in both communities). At baseline this population had poor knowledge of their own BP numbers and poor understanding of the diseases related to high BP. Although few considered high BP a health concern, they had good understanding of lifestyle interventions for high BP prevention and control. The number of the respondents who claimed to have high BP increased immediately after intervention in the test city (38%; P < .02), whereas the number of respondents who were treated and uncontrolled decreased (P < .05) compared to control. There was a significant increase in patients' knowledge of consequences and in their perception that they were most responsible for high BP control in the test city (P < .005) compared to control. At 6 months, no further changes were observed in those claiming to have high BP in either city, whereas decay to baseline in those treated but not controlled and those claiming responsibility for their BP control was observed in the test city. No changes were observed in the control city accept for an increase from baseline to 6 months in the percentage claiming to be treated but uncontrolled. We were unable to determine whether the increase in number treated but uncontrolled was due to a higher treatment rate, similar treatment rate but more patients being uncontrolled, or a combination of these scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: High BP is very prevalent in adults and knowledge of lifestyle options for management is encouraging. In the short-term, although our media awareness program increased the number of respondents claiming to have high BP and patient self-efficacy for BP control, this was not maintained. We did not change knowledge of consequences or importantly, the health importance of BP control among those at risk. Hence, in addition to a mass media campaign, attention should be focused on dissemination of awareness knowledge information through medical professionals at the point of care.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations43
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of HypertensionSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207