Physician Practice Patterns in the Treatment of Isolated Systolic Hypertension in a Primary Care Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors evaluated the treatment of isolated systolic hypertension based on medical record review of charts between 1998 and 1999 in a multispecialty physician practice group. Two age-stratified random samples of ambulatory medical records were examined (393 patients aged > or =65 years and 251 patients aged 50-64 years). The samples corresponded to the practices of 35 primary care physicians who were surveyed about their hypertension care. Isolated systolic hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure > or =140 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg. Results showed that isolated systolic hypertension represented 76% and 45% of uncontrolled blood pressure in the older and middle-aged samples, respectively. Isolated systolic hypertension was often undiagnosed and untreated. Physicians reported treatment thresholds and goals that were significantly less aggressive for their patients > or =65 years of age. Physician awareness and treatment of isolated systolic hypertension have not yet caught up with consensus guidelines, and older patients may be affected most by this gap.
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 | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".