Hypertension prevalence and risk factors in rural and urban Zambian adults in western province: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hypertension is a longstanding problem in Zambia, yet little is known about its prevalence and risk factors, particularly in rural and urban settings. Identifying geographical variations in hypertension is important to enhance the health of adult Zambians regardless of where they live. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of hypertension and related risk factors between rural (n = 130) and urban (n = 131) communities in Western Province, Zambia. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included urban and rural adult Zambians attending health checks who completed a modified World Health Organization (WHO) survey, and had blood pressure and anthropometric measurements completed. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize demographic and risk factor variables. Chi-square tests of association were used to analyze relationships between categorical variables, t-tests to analyze relationships between continuous variables and logistic regression to examine associations of hypertension with selected risk factors. RESULTS: The prevalence of hypertension in rural Zambians was double (46.9%) that of urban Zambians (22.9%). Increasing age, not engaging in walking/biking, and alcohol intake within the last 30 days were associated with an increased likelihood of hypertension in rural Zambians while eating vegetables more days during the week was associated with a decreased likelihood of hypertension in rural Zambians. Body Mass Index (BMI) was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of hypertension in urban Zambians. CONCLUSION: Modifiable risk factors (such as BMI, dietary intake, and physical activity) are associated with hypertension prevalence in this population, indicating opportunities for screening and other prevention measures.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".