Asociación entre el grado de control de la hipertensión arterial, la comorbilidad y los costes en personas de más de 30 años durante el año 2006
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arterial hypertension is one of the main reasons for primary care consultations. This study is aimed at determining the relationship among the degree to which arterial hypertension is controlled, comorbidity and the direct costs in primary care. METHODS: Retrospective, multi-centre design. Subjects over 30 years of age pertaining to five primary care teams (2006) were included. CRITERIA: good control (<140/90 and <130/80 mmHg in diabetics and those with cardiovascular disease [CVD]. Main general measurements, CVD, Charlson index, casuistic/comorbidity (Adjusted Clinical Groups), clinical parameters and direct costs (fixed/semifixed and variable costs) [medications, tests and referrals]) Logic regression and ANCOVA for correcting the model, p<0.05. RESULTS: The prevalence of arterial hypertension was 26.5% (mean age: 67.1 years; males: 43.5%). Good control totalled 52.0% (CI: 51.2-52.8%). Poor control was independently related to diabetes (Odds Ratio=3.8), CVD (Odds Ratio=2.2) and males (Odds Ratio=1.2), p<0.001. The average/direct unit cost/year was 1,202.13 Euro vs. 1,183.55 Euro (p=0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Those individuals whose arterial hypertension was poorly controlled displayed a greater burden of morbidity and a similar healthcare cost in comparison to those under good control.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it