Blood pressure and burden of hypertension in Cameroon, a microcosm of Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate national and geography-based variations in blood pressure and burden of hypertension in Cameroon, generally called 'miniature Africa'. METHODS: PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, CINHAL, Web of Science, Popline, Scopus and BDSP were searched through November 2018, for hypertension studies among Cameroonians aged at least 18 years. Hypertension was measured as SBP at least 140 mmHg or DBP at least 90 mmHg. Random-effects meta-analysis was used. RESULTS: Twenty studies involving 46 491 participants met inclusion criteria. Overall hypertension prevalence was 30.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 27.0-34.8]: 29.6% (24.1-35.1) and 32.1% (27.2-37.1) in 1994-2010 and 2011-2018, respectively. Of hypertensive participants, only 24.4% (18.9-30.0) - 31.6% (21.0-42.3) and 20.8% (14.0-27.7) in 1994-2010 and 2011-2018, respectively - were aware of their status, 15.1% (10.6-19.6) were taking antihypertensive medications and 8.8% (5.7-11.9) - 10.4% (7.5-13.3) and 8.3% (4.4-12.3) in 1994-2010 and 2011-2018, respectively - were controlled. Hypertension prevalence varied by sex: 34.3% (30.0-38.6) for men and 31.3% (26.5-36.1) for women; ethnicity: from 3.3% (0.4-6.2) among Pygmies to 56.6% (49.4-63.8) among Bamileke; urbanity: 25.4% (17.1-33.7) for rural and 31.4% (27.3-35.5) for urban dwellers; agroecological zone: from 35.1% (28.9-41.3) in Tropical highlands to 28% (20.1-35.9) in Guinea-Savannah; and subnational region: from 36.3% (27.8-44.9) in the West to 17.1% (9.9-44.2) in the South. CONCLUSION: Cameroon's hypertension prevalence is high and increasing whereas awareness, treatment and control are low and declining. Emerging patterns call urgently for effective campaigns to raise hypertension awareness alongside strategies for hypertension prevention and BP control.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".