Prevention of Hypertension in Bangladesh: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypertension is a major public health problemglobally in both the developed and developing countries. Hypertension leads to cardiovascular diseases, stroke, kidney failure and is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity globally. The risk factors for hypertension, which can mostly be prevented through simple health promotion and preventive measures are mostly known. However, papers documenting the strategies for prevention of hypertension in Bangladesh is not available. The aim of this review study was to identify and discuss different approaches to prevent hypertension in Bangladesh. We performed a systematic search using electronic as well as manual method for published and unpublished reports of prevention of hypertension. We then identified and discussed prevention strategies for hypertension suitable for Bangladesh context. Although several methods have shown to prevent hypertension, the challenge remains in implementing these methods in resource poor settings. Integrated action based on comprehensive policy and stepwise implementation should be adopted taking into consideration of local needs. Hypertension prevention should focus on awareness generation, health promotion and reduction of common risk factors using a combination of population based approach and targeted individual interventions. Consorted actions should be taken as a priority to prevent hypertension through intersectoral, multidisciplinary and multilevel approach by the Government, Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), civil societies and create greater awareness among the population for a healthy life-style.J MEDICINE January 2016; 17 (1) : 30-35
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".