Effects of an interdisciplinary education program on hypertension: A pilot study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The goal of this pilot study was to examine the effects of a structured interdisciplinary education program on blood pressure, knowledge, anthropometric measures, medication compliance, behavioural risk factors and quality of life. METHOD: In this quasi-experimental study, participants were assigned to an intervention (n = 21) or a regular care group (n = 19). The intervention group attended four weekly sessions related to hypertension. Anthropometric measures and blood pressure were recorded at baseline, one, three and six months for all participants. Both groups completed questionnaires on knowledge, health-related behaviours and quality of life at these same intervals. RESULTS: The reduction in systolic blood pressure was greater in the intervention group than in the regular care group (p = 0.05). However, there were no between group differences with regard to the other variables studied. CONCLUSION: Participation in a structured interdisciplinary education program was associated with a reduction of systolic blood pressure, thus contributing to a risk reduction for cardiovascular disease.
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) | 0.000 | 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".