Antihypertensive Medication Use and Blood Pressure Control: A Community-Based Cross-Sectional Survey (ON-BP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Ontario Blood Pressure (ON-BP) survey reported high treatment and control rates for hypertension in the province of Ontario, Canada, in a survey performed in 2006. This study examined patterns of utilization of antihypertensive drug classes and their impact on blood pressure (BP) control. METHODS: Cross-sectional, population-based survey of adults, 20-79 years of age (population 7,996,653). Responses are weighted to the Ontario hypertensive population of 1,498,045. RESULTS: Of all hypertensives, 51 and 49% were on monotherapy vs. 2+ drug therapy with similar control rates (86 vs. 80%, respectively). In those on monotherapy a renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blocker was the most commonly used drug class (62%) and use of other drug classes was only approximately 10%. In those on 2+ therapy, a RAS blocker was also the most common class (80%), followed by a diuretic (67%). In diabetics with hypertension 46 and 54% were on monotherapy vs. 2+ drug therapy with significantly higher control rates on monotherapy (90 vs. 46%). RAS blocker was also the most common drug class (85 and 80%, respectively), but in those on 2+ drugs only 45% were on a diuretic. Control rates did not differ by type of drug treatment in the overall hypertensive population and those with a comorbidity, but were low in diabetics on 2+ therapy and particularly in those on a calcium channel blocker (CCB) or diuretic. CONCLUSIONS: High treatment and control rates of hypertension in Ontario are associated with high utilization of RAS blockers. Diabetics on 2+ therapy are the least effectively controlled, possibly reflecting the limited use of diuretics.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".