Baseline Characteristics and Early Blood Pressure Control in the CONVINCE Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
-Blood pressure (BP) control rates around the world are suboptimal. Part 2 of the National Health and Nutrition Educational Survey (NHANES) III indicates that only 27.4% of hypertensive Americans aged 18 to 74 years have a BP of <140/90 mm Hg. We wanted to assess BP control during the first 2 years and to describe the baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the Controlled ONset Verapamil INvestigation of Cardiovascular Endpoints (CONVINCE) Study, an international clinical trial that compares outcomes in hypertensive patients randomized to initial treatment with either controlled-onset extended-release verapamil or the investigator's choice of atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide. At randomization, BP was <140/90 mm Hg in only 20.3% of the 16 602 subjects (average+/-SD age 65.6+/-7.4 years; 56% women, 84% white/7% black/7% Hispanic). The average BP at enrollment was 148/85 mm Hg for patients taking BP medications (n=13 879) and 161/94 mm Hg for previously untreated patients (n=2723). After medication titration, with a transtelephonic computer that recommended an increase in the dose or number of antihypertensive agents whenever the BP was 140/90 mm Hg, 84.8% of the subjects attained the goal BP. During 2 years of treatment, BP control was maintained in 67% to 69% of the subjects (69% to 71% for systolic BP of <140 mm Hg and 90% for diastolic BP of <90 mm Hg). These data suggest that the control of systolic BP is more difficult than the control of diastolic BP. The US national goal of having 50% of hypertensives with a BP of <140/90 mm Hg may be achievable if a forced titration strategy is used. Interested investigators, free care and medications, and well-educated subjects may make the attainment of such a goal easier in the CONVINCE study than in the general population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".