MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of a Multidisciplinary Information Technology–Supported Program on Blood Pressure Control in Primary Care

2009· article· en· W2113979937 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPfizer CanadaPfizer
KeywordsMedicineMultidisciplinary approachPrimary careBlood pressureIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a leading mortality risk factor yet inadequately controlled in most affected subjects. Effective programs to address this problem are lacking. We hypothesized that an information technology-supported management program could help improve blood pressure (BP) control. METHODS AND RESULTS: This randomized controlled trial included 223 primary care hypertensive subjects with mean 24-hour BP >130/80 and daytime BP >135/85 mm Hg measured with ambulatory monitoring (ABPM). Intervention subjects received a BP monitor and access to an information technology-supported adherence and BP monitoring system providing nurses, pharmacists, and physicians with monthly reports. Control subjects received usual care. The mean (+/-SD) follow-up was 348 (+/-78) and 349 (+/-84) days in the intervention and control group, respectively. The primary end point of the change in the mean 24-hour ambulatory BP was consistently greater in intervention subjects for both systolic (-11.9 versus -7.1 mm Hg; P<0.001) and diastolic BP (-6.6 versus -4.5 mm Hg; P=0.007). The proportion of subjects that achieved Canadian Guideline target BP (46.0% versus 28.6%) was also greater in the intervention group (P=0.006). We observed similar BP declines for ABPM and self-recorded home BP suggesting the latter could be an alternative for confirming BP control. The intervention was associated with more physician-driven antihypertensive dose adjustments or changes in agents (P=0.03), more antihypertensive classes at study end (P=0.007), and a trend toward improved adherence measured by prescription refills (P=0.07). CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary information technology-supported program that provided feedback to patients and healthcare providers significantly improved blood pressure levels in a primary care setting.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.295 · 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