MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808279075 · doi:10.1111/jch.13320

Hypertension, knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary care physicians in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia

2018· article· en· W2808279075 on OpenAlexaff
Maral Myanganbayar, Uurtsaikh Baatarsuren, Guanmin Chen, Roberta Bosurgi, Geoffrey So, Norm R.C. Campbell, Nasantogtokh Erdenebileg, Khulan Ganbaatar, Purevjargal Magsarjav, Manduukhai Batsukh, Tsatsralgerel Munkherdene, Tsolmon Unurjargal, Myagmartseren Dashtseren, Namkhaidorj Tserengombo, Batbold Batsukh, Andreas Bungert, Naranbaatar Dashdorj

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Hypertension · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaFoothills Medical CentreAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicinePrimary careBlood pressureGeneral practicePediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary care doctors in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia using a recently developed World Hypertension League survey. The survey was administered as part of a quality assurance initiative to enhance hypertension control. A total of 577 surveys were distributed and 467 were completed (81% response rate). The respondents had an average age of 35 years and 90.1% were female. Knowledge of hypertension epidemiology was low (13.5% of questions answered correctly); 31% of clinical practice questions had correct answers and confidence in performing specific tasks to improve hypertension control had 63.2% "desirable/correct" answers. Primary care doctors mostly had a positive attitude toward hypertension management (76.5% desirable/correct answers) and highly prioritized hypertension management activities (85.7% desirable/correct answers). Some important highlights included the majority (> 80%) overestimating hypertension awareness, treatment, and control rates; 78.2% used aneroid blood pressure manometers; 15% systematically screened adults for hypertension in their clinics; 21.8% reported 2 or more drugs were required to control hypertension in most people; and 16.1% reported most people could be controlled by lifestyle changes alone. 55% of respondents were not comfortable prescribing more than 1 or 2 antihypertensive drugs in a patient and the percentage of desirable/correct responses to treating various high-risk patients was low. Most (53%-74%) supported task shifting to nonphysician health care providers except for drug prescribing, which only 13.9% supported. A hypertension clinical education program is currently being designed based on the specific needs identified in the survey.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical HypertensionSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207