Hypertension Management in the Elderly Has Improved
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To examine whether the treatment of elderly hypertensives had become more aggressive over the past decade, we evaluated: (1) the frequency of new prescriptions for hypertension treatment, adjusted by age and gender; (2) the frequency with which multiple antihypertensives were prescribed concurrently within 2 years of initial diagnosis; and (3) discontinuation rates for antihypertensive therapy. We linked 4 administrative databases and a province-wide clinical database in Ontario, Canada, to derive a cohort of patients > or =66 years of age who were newly started on an antihypertensive agent between July 1, 1994, and March 31, 2002, without another indication for the agent (all patients were followed for 2 years after their initial antihypertensive prescription). Our cohort consisted of 196 451 people newly started on antihypertensive therapy, 30 433 of whom also had diabetes mellitus. The population-adjusted rate of new antihypertensive prescriptions increased by 30% between 1994 and 2002. Whereas 21% of patients newly diagnosed with hypertension in 1994 were prescribed multiple antihypertensives concurrently within 2 years of diagnosis, this proportion had increased to 40% by 2002 (P<0.0001). In the cohort of patients first prescribed an antihypertensive in 1994, 36% were not taking any antihypertensive within 2 years; only 21% of patients first prescribed an antihypertensive in 2002 had discontinued all therapy within 2 years (P<0.0001). Our data provide evidence that the physician management of hypertension in elderly Canadians became more aggressive between 1994 and 2002.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".