Systematic Review of Hypertension and Diabetes Burden, Risk Factors, and Interventions for Prevention and Control in Malawi: The NCD BRITE Consortium
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies have found an increasing burden of noncommunicable diseases in sub-Saharan Africa. A compressive search of PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and the World Health Organization Global Health Library databases was undertaken to identify studies reporting on the prevalence, risk factors, and interventions for hypertension and diabetes in Malawi. The findings from 23 included studies revealed a high burden of hypertension and diabetes in Malawi, with estimates ranging from 15.8% to 32.9% and from 2.4% to 5.6%, respectively. Associated risk factors included old age, tobacco smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, obesity, physical inactivity, high salt and sugar intake, low fruit and vegetable intake, high body mass index, and high waist-to-hip ratio. Certain antiretroviral therapy regimens were also associated with increased diabetes and hypertension risk in human immunodeficiency virus patient populations. Nationwide, the quality of clinical care was generally limited and demonstrated a need for innovative and targeted interventions to prevent, control, and treat noncommunicable diseases in Malawi.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it