Assessment of a hypertension screening and education intervention in Charlestown, Guyana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypertension is the leading cause of mortality among Guyanese between the ages of 45 and 64 years and is inversely related to wealth and education. This pilot study aims to determine 1) the feasibility of a pharmacy-based clinic, 2) the prevalence of elevated blood pressure and 3) the outcome of follow-up of those with elevated blood pressure. METHODS: Participants were recruited based on a convenience sample. Adults with or without a previous diagnosis of hypertension were included. Screening, education and patient counselling were provided. Participants with elevated blood pressure readings were contacted 1 month after the initial visit for a follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-two subjects between the ages of 27 and 78 years participated: 32% (7 of 22) were found to have elevated blood pressure readings, and 71% (5 of 7) of those with high blood pressure readings visited a physician within 1 month of the screening. Of those prescribed antihypertensive medications, 71% (5 of 7) reported low adherence to their medication. CONCLUSION: The methods developed in this study advanced knowledge on the effective management of hypertension in a developing country. One-third of participants were found to have elevated blood pressure. Among those with elevated blood pressure, most followed up with a physician and were diagnosed with hypertension. Pharmacists and pharmacies can play a pivotal role in providing education and improving drug therapy adherence. The need for pharmacy interventions is heightened in areas where access to physicians is scarce. This pilot study illustrates that a pharmacy-based screening and education intervention is indeed feasible.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".