Diagnosed hypertension in Canada: incidence, prevalence and associated mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a leading risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Our objectives were to examine the prevalence and incidence of diagnosed hypertension in Canada and compare mortality among people with and without diagnosed hypertension. METHODS: We obtained data from linked health administrative databases from each province and territory for adults aged 20 years and older. We used a validated case definition to identify people with hypertension diagnosed between 1998/99 and 2007/08. We excluded pregnant women from the analysis. RESULTS: This retrospective population-based study included more than 26 million people. In 2007/08, about 6 million adults (23.0%) were living with diagnosed hypertension and about 418,000 had a new diagnosis. The age-standardized prevalence increased significantly from 12.5% in 1998/99 to 19.6% in 2007/08, and the incidence decreased from 2.7 to 2.4 per 100. Among people aged 60 years and older, the prevalence was higher among women than among men, as was the incidence among people aged 75 years and older. The prevalence and incidence were highest in the Atlantic region. For all age groups, all-cause mortality was higher among adults with diagnosed hypertension than among those without diagnosed hypertension. INTERPRETATION: The overall prevalence of diagnosed hypertension in Canada from 1998 to 2008 was high and increasing, whereas the incidence declined during the same period. These findings highlight the need to continue monitoring the effectiveness of efforts for managing hypertension and to enhance public health programs aimed at preventing hypertension.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".