Observational Study of Hypertension in Matelica, Italy (Matelica Hypertension Study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study summarizes the results of an epidemiological investigation carried out on the occasion of the Second World Hypertension Day (May 13, 2006) in the city of Matelica in the Region of the Marches, Central Italy. In all, 518 subjects (298 males, average age 52.3 years; 220 females, average age 55 years) with either diagnosed hypertension or who were thought to be normotensive had arterial blood pressure measured. Other cardiovascular risk factors and the costs of pharmacological treatment for hypertension were assessed as well. In 72.46% of examined subjects, arterial blood pressure levels averaged > or =140-90 mmHg if non-diabetic and > or =130-80 mmHg if diabetics. A total of 48.14% of individuals assumed in anamnesis to be normotensive had arterial blood pressure levels higher than the above values and were therefore found to have hypertensive values. The cost of anti-hypertensive treatment in the area of Matelica averages Euro 543.7/patient/year. The present data, which are in line with those of other epidemiological studies performed in Italy, confirm the view that arterial hypertension control in Italy is still largely unsatisfactory. This observation should stimulate both health and specific medical measures to counter the risk of complications of arterial hypertension in aged populations, such as those present in the territory examined.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".