Blood pressure in Canadian adults.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypertension is estimated to cause more than one-eighth of all deaths worldwide. In Canada, the last national surveys to include direct measures of blood pressure (BP) took place over the years 1985-1992; hypertension was estimated at 21%. DATA AND METHODS: Data are from cycle 1 of the Canadian Health Measures Survey, conducted from March 2007 through February 2009. The survey included direct BP measures using an automated device. Weighted frequencies, means and cross-tabulations were produced to estimate levels of hypertension awareness, treatment and control in the population aged 20 to 79 years. RESULTS: Among adults aged 20 to 79 years, hypertension (systolic BP higher than or equal to 140 or diastolic BP higher than or equal to 90 mm Hg, or self-reported recent medication use for high BP) was present in 19%. Another 20% had BP in the pre-hypertension range (systolic 120 to 139 or diastolic 80 to 89 mm Hg). Of those with hypertension, 83% were aware, 80% were taking antihypertensive drugs, and 66% were controlled. Uncontrolled hypertension was largely due to high systolic BP. INTERPRETATION: Hypertension prevalence is similar to that reported in 1992. Since then, the level of hypertension control has increased considerably.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".