Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resistant hypertension (failure to achieve target blood pressures with three or more antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic) is an important and preventable cause of stroke. Hypertension is highly prevalent in China (>60% of persons above age 65), and only ~6% of hypertensives in China are controlled to target levels. Most strokes occur among persons with resistant hypertension; approximately half of strokes could be prevented by blood pressure control. Reasons for uncontrolled hypertension include (1) non-compliance; (2) consumption of substances that aggravated hypertension, such as excess salt, alcohol, licorice, decongestants and oral contraceptives; (3) therapeutic inertia (failure to intensify therapy when target blood pressures are not achieved); and (4) diagnostic inertia (failure to investigate the cause of resistant hypertension). In China, an additional factor is lack of availability of appropriate antihypertensive therapy in many healthcare settings. Sodium restriction in combination with a diet similar to the Cretan Mediterranean or the DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diet can lower blood pressure in proportion to the severity of hypertension. Physiologically individualised therapy for hypertension based on phenotyping by plasma renin activity and aldosterone can markedly improve blood pressure control. Renal hypertension (high renin/high aldosterone) is best treated with angiotensin receptor antagonists; primary aldosteronism (low renin/high aldosterone) is best treated with aldosterone antagonists (spironolactone or eplerenone); and hypertension due to overactivity of the renal epithelial sodium channel (low renin/low aldosterone; Liddle phenotype) is best treated with amiloride. The latter is far more common than most physicians suppose.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.013 |
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".