MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142053041 · doi:10.1016/s0828-282x(10)70378-0

The 2010 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: Part I – blood pressure measurement, diagnosis and assessment of risk

2010· review· en· W2142053041 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Robert R. Quinn, Brenda R. Hemmelgarn, Raj Padwal, Martin G. Myers, Lyne Cloutier, Peter Bolli, Donald W. McKay, Nadia Khan, Michael D. Hill, Jeff Mahon, Daniel G. Hackam, Steven A. Grover, Thomas W. Wilson, Brian Penner, Ellen Burgess, Finlay A. McAlister, Maxime Lamarre-Cliché, Donna McLean, Ernesto L. Schiffrin, George Honos, Karen Mann, Guy Tremblay, Alain Milot, Arun Chockalingam, Simon W. Rabkin, Martin Dawes, Rhian M. Touyz, Kevin D. Burns, Marcel Ruzicka, Norman R.C. Campbell, Michel Vallée, G. V. Ramesh Prasad, Marcel Lebel, Sheldon W. Tobe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Cardiology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecDalhousie UniversityUniversity of OttawaAlberta Health ServicesJewish General HospitalMontreal General HospitalSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaMontreal Clinical Research InstituteUniversity of ManitobaWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoMemorial University of NewfoundlandHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversité de MontréalUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of AlbertaHôtel-Dieu de QuébecHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of CalgaryVancouver General HospitalHôpital du Saint-Sacrement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureConcomitantRisk assessmentAmbulatory blood pressureIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineMEDLINEAdverse effectInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations347
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CardiologySame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207