MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2745372500 · doi:10.7326/l17-0285

Pharmacologic Treatment of Hypertension in Adults Aged 60 Years or Older

2017· letter· en· W2745372500 on OpenAlexaffabout
Doreen M. Rabi, Stella S. Daskalopoulou, Alexander A. C. Leung, George K. Dresser, Raj Padwal, Nadia Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsCustom Security Industries (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicineBlood pressurePopulationGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Letters15 August 2017Pharmacologic Treatment of Hypertension in Adults Aged 60 Years or OlderDoreen M. Rabi, MS, MSc, Stella S. Daskalopoulou, MD, MSc, PhD, DIC, Alexander A. Leung, MD, MPH, George Dresser, MD, PhD, Raj Padwal, MD, MSc, and Nadia Khan, MD, MScDoreen M. Rabi, MS, MScFrom Hypertension Canada, Markham, Ontario, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Stella S. Daskalopoulou, MD, MSc, PhD, DICFrom Hypertension Canada, Markham, Ontario, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Alexander A. Leung, MD, MPHFrom Hypertension Canada, Markham, Ontario, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, George Dresser, MD, PhDFrom Hypertension Canada, Markham, Ontario, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Raj Padwal, MD, MScFrom Hypertension Canada, Markham, Ontario, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, and Nadia Khan, MD, MScFrom Hypertension Canada, Markham, Ontario, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/L17-0285 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR:As contributors to Hypertension Canada's clinical practice guidelines, we have concerns about Qaseem and colleagues' new recommendations on hypertension management in persons aged 60 years or older, which were developed by the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians (1). These recommendations were based on a systematic review by Weiss and associates, which evaluated the effect of more versus less intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (SBP) on cardiovascular outcomes in this population and was published in the same issue. Weiss and colleagues' review, while well done, had notable limitations. Namely, data were ...References1. Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Rich R, Humphrey LL, Frost J, Forciea MA; Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians and the Commission on Health of the Public and Science of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Pharmacologic treatment of hypertension in adults aged 60 years or older to higher versus lower blood pressure targets: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166:430-7. [PMID: 28135725]. doi:10.7326/M16-1785 LinkGoogle Scholar2. Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP, Goff DC, Grimm RH, Cutler JA, et al; ACCORD Study Group. Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1575-85. [PMID: 20228401] doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1001286 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Xie X, Atkins E, Lv J, Bennett A, Neal B, Ninomiya T, et al. Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular and renal outcomes: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2016;387:435-43. [PMID: 26559744] doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00805-3 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Ettehad D, Emdin CA, Kiran A, Anderson SG, Callender T, Emberson J, et al. Blood pressure lowering for prevention of cardiovascular disease and death: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2016;387:957-67. [PMID: 26724178] doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01225-8 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Williamson JD, Supiano MA, Applegate WB, Berlowitz DR, Campbell RC, Chertow GM, et al; SPRINT Research Group. Intensive vs standard blood pressure control and cardiovascular disease outcomes in adults aged > =75 years: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315:2673-82. [PMID: 27195814] doi:10.1001/jama.2016.7050 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From Hypertension Canada, Markham, Ontario, Canada.Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=L17-0285. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoPharmacologic Treatment of Hypertension in Adults Aged 60 Years or Older to Higher Versus Lower Blood Pressure Targets: A Clinical Practice Guideline From the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians Amir Qaseem , Timothy J. Wilt , Robert Rich , Linda L. Humphrey , Jennifer Frost , Mary Ann Forciea , and Pharmacologic Treatment of Hypertension in Adults Aged 60 Years or Older Devan Kansagara , Timothy J. Wilt , Jennifer Frost , and Amir Qaseem Pharmacologic Treatment of Hypertension in Adults Aged 60 Years or Older William C. Cushman , Karen C. Johnson , William B. Applegate , and Jeffrey A. Cutler Metrics 15 August 2017Volume 167, Issue 4Page: 289-290KeywordsBlood pressureDisclosureElderlyHypertensionMortalitySerious adverse eventsStrokeSystematic reviewsSystolic pressureTreatment guidelines ePublished: 15 August 2017 Issue Published: 15 August 2017 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2017 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.010

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.

Opus teacher head0.150
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal Medicine→Same topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies→French-language works237,207→