MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122654187 · doi:10.1017/s1463423611000077

Health risk appraisal for older people 4: case finding for hypertension, hyperlipidaemia and diabetes mellitus in older people in English general practice before the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework

2011· article· en· W2122654187 on OpenAlexaff
Mareeni Raymond, Steve Iliffe, Kalpa Kharicha, Danielle Harari, Cameron Swift, Gerhard Gillmann, Andreas E. Stuck

Bibliographic record

VenuePrimary Health Care Research & Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusBody mass indexBlood pressureGerontologyPopulationDiseaseHealth carePhysical therapyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early intervention can help to reduce the burden of disability in the older population, but many do not access preventive care. There is uncertainty over what factors influence case finding in older patients in general practice. AIM: To explore factors associated with case finding for hypertension, hyperlipidaemia and diabetes mellitus in older patients. METHOD: Two thousand four hundred and ninety-one patients aged 65 years and above were recruited from three large practices in suburban London before the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) completed a questionnaire on health, functional status, health behaviours and preventive care. FINDINGS: Those not reporting heart disease, diabetes or hypertension were included in a secondary data analysis to explore factors influencing uptake of preventive care measures. Approximately one-third denied having had a blood pressure check in the previous year. They were more likely to have had little contact with doctors and to have an unhealthy lifestyle (smoking and a high-fat diet). One-third reported a cholesterol test in the previous five years. Cholesterol measurement was reported more often by men and those with a high body mass index. Those with unhealthy lifestyles (smoking and high-fat diet), those who had only received the state pension and those who limited their activities because of a fear of falling were less likely to report cholesterol measurement. About 10% reported a fasting blood glucose measurement and were more likely to consult more often and have more medications, but they were less likely to have a high-fat diet. Preventive care uptake was associated with frequent contacts with doctors, but overall the uptake of preventive care was low. Older people with healthier lifestyles were more likely to have primary preventative care interventions. These findings provide a baseline against which the effect of the QOF on the care of older people can be measured in future studies.

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 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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrimary Health Care Research & DevelopmentSame topicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionFrench-language works237,207