MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recommendations for Evaluating Compliance and Persistence With Hypertension Therapy Using Retrospective Data

2006· review· en· W2139584372 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedication Adherence and Compliance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersistence (discontinuity)Compliance (psychology)MedicineRetrospective cohort studyIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. The World Health Organization Global Burden of Disease Study estimates that nonoptimal blood pressure [(BP) ie, systolic BP of 115 mm Hg] is responsible annually for 7.1 million deaths and the loss of 64.3 disability-adjusted life years worldwide. he associated economic burden of hypertension is also substantial. The average annual medical care cost for individuals with hypertension has been estimated at $3900 (in year 2000 US dollars) in Canada, 2 with similar values ($3787) for the United States. The increase in medical care costs is greater for those with moderate-to-severe BP elevation (diastolic BP 104 mm Hg) than for those with mild disease. lthough a broad range of hypertension medications have been demonstrated to reduce BP, and BP control is an achievable goal, 5 reports suggest that up to two thirds of patients with hypertension are not successfully treated, that is, achieve BP control. 6 -8 According to the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC-7), BP control rates are far below the "healthy people" goal of 50% set in 2000. 9 A major (and modifiable) reason for lack of BP control is failure by patients to use medications as prescribed. 10 Appropriate use of medications includes compliance, taking medications at the prescribed frequency/ interval and dose/dosing regimen, and persistence, continuing their use for the specified treatment time period, which, in the case of hypertension therapy, is usually lifelong. Poor compliance with hypertension medications is associated with adverse health outcomes. udies have demonstrated that poor BP control is associated with greater healthcare costs. For example, in the United States, inadequate control of hypertension has been estimated to result in 40 000 cardiovascular events, 8000 cardiovascular disease deaths, and approximately $964 million in direct medical expenditures. Similarly, poor compliance and lack of persistence with BP medications are associated with increased health care costs. Whereas patients who interrupted hypertension therapy had decreased medication costs, they had greater increases in costs for other health care, mainly reflecting increased hospital costs. In other disease states, such as diabetes and hypercholesterolemia, whereas increased compliance is associated with increased medication costs (because compliant patients use more medication), overall health care costs decrease because of better disease control and lower rates of adverse outcomes. ompliance and persistence can be measured in both retrospective and prospective studies, both of which can provide data on "real world" clinical practice. However, participants in prospective evaluations may not be comparable to broader patient populations. Furthermore, prospective evaluations can potentially introduce biases, particularly in patient behaviors related to compliance and persistence. Although the use of retrospective databases avoids these problems, the lack of consistent methods for evaluation of hypertension treatment compliance and persistence in such studies makes comparisons of results among studies difficult. As presented in a review by Lopatriello et al, In addition, the lack of broadly agreed-on methods creates substantial barriers for evaluating the potential impact of compliance and persistence on BP control. Given the importance of this issue, we have developed a set of recommendations for retrospective studies assessing compliance and persistence in hypertension.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.755
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.274 · 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