Lifestyle Changes and Blood Pressure Control: A Community‐Based Cross‐Sectional Survey (2006 Ontario Survey on the Prevalence and Control of Hypertension)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate lifestyle changes and their impact on hypertension control in a sample of hypertensive respondents in Ontario, Canada, diet, physical activity, and other nonpharmacologic measures were recorded using a structured questionnaire during the 2006 Ontario Survey on the Prevalence and Control of Hypertension. Responses were weighted to the total adult population of 7,996,653 in Ontario. The prevalence of hypertension was 21%; 42% of hypertensive persons received therapy with antihypertensive drugs and lifestyle changes, and 41% received therapy with drugs only. Blood pressure was controlled in 85% of respondents who used only drugs and in 78% of those who stated that they received therapy with combined drug treatment and lifestyle changes. Fewer than half of hypertensive respondents practiced lifestyle changes (in combination with drug treatment) for blood pressure control. Lifestyle measures in addition to medication use did not result in better control of hypertension compared to only medication use.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".