MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124535060 · doi:10.3402/ijch.v69i1.17431

Blood pressure 2 years after a chronic disease management intervention study

2010· article· en· W2124535060 on OpenAlexafffund
Sheldon W. Tobe, Lloyd Vincent, Joan Wentworth, Denise Hildebrandt, Alexander Kiss, Nancy Perkins, Susan Hartman, Laurie Ironstand, Jacquie Hoppe, Katie Hunter, George Pylypchuk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Circumpolar Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of SaskatchewanHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBlood pressureMedicineObservational studyDiabetes mellitusConfidence intervalClinical endpointPhysical therapyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To follow blood pressure change over time in participants who had participated in a 1- year chronic disease management program focused on blood pressure reduction. The expectation was that blood pressure would return back to the baseline once the study was completed. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-arm observational study. METHODS: Study participants were Status Indians living on-reserve with type 2 diabetes and persistent hypertension who had participated in the DREAM3 study. Blood pressure was measured with the BpTRU automated device every 6 months for 2 years. The primary endpoint was the change in systolic blood pressure over the follow-up period. RESULTS: Sixty of the original 96 participants agreed to participate in the follow-up. Mean blood pressure at the beginning of the follow-up was 130/76 (SD 18/12) mmHg. Mean blood pressure at the end of the follow-up period was 132/76 (17/9 SD) mmHg. Target blood pressure (<130/80 mmHg) was present in 53%. The 99% confidence limit around change of blood pressure over the 24 months of follow-up was +/-4.7 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expectations, the participants maintained their blood pressure control and did not revert to baseline levels. Community awareness and engagement resulting from the chronic disease management program led to a sustainable improvement in the health parameters of the participants and the community that lasted beyond the duration of the 1-year DREAM3 project.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Circumpolar HealthSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207