Bibliographic record
Abstract
HYPERTENSIONTo compare the effect of newer therapies with diuretics on the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) in hypertensive patients, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute sponsored The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT).The largest randomized, double-blind, active-controlled hypertension trial ever performed, ALLHAT was designed to determine whether the occurrence of fatal CHD or nonfatal myocardial infarction (primary outcome) in high-risk patients with hypertension is lower when treated with a representative dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (CCB) (amlodipine), a representative angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (lisinopril), or a representative α blocker (doxazosin), each compared with a representative long-acting thiazide diuretic (chlorthalidone).Discussions of this trial have been published in the November/December 2002 and January/February 2003 issues of The Journal of Clinical Hypertension.Recruitment occurred between 1994 and 1998, with data collection ending in March of 2002.The range of follow-up was from 3 years 8 months to 8 years 1 month (mean, 4.9 years).The study recruited 42,418 men and women from 623 centers in the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands.About 7000 US veterans participated through 69 Department of Veterans Affairs clinics.Eligible participants were aged 55 years or older with at least one additional coronary risk factor.The risk factors included previous myocardial infarction or stroke (at least 6 months previously), electrocardiographically or echocardiographically measured left ventricular hypertrophy, history of type 2 diabetes, current cigarette smoking, high-density HDL choles-A n a l y s i s o f R e c e n t P a p e r s i n H y p e r t e n s i o n
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 | 0.007 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.010 |
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".