MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

BLOOD PRESSURE PREVALENCE WITH STRATIFICATION AND ASSOCIATIONS: A COMMUNITY-BASED STUDY FROM LONGITUDINAL COHORT HOUSEHOLD SURVEY 2019

2021· article· en· W3153511738 on OpenAlexaff
Nilanjana Chakaraborty, Kaushik Chakraborty, Ramendra Nath Mitra, Angana Saha, Papri Chatterjee, Subhankar Manna, Dipra Mitra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Research Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePrehypertensionCohortBlood pressurePopulationAnthropometryCohort studyOdds ratioDemographyPhysical therapyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: For decades morbidity and mortality due to hypertension remains the major contributor of NCD burden worldwide. Objective is to assess the prevalence of a community cohort's Blood Pressure of all categories: measured hypertension (mHTN), self-reported doctor diagnosed hypertension (DDH), undiagnosed hypertension (UDH), also blood pressure stratification followed as per Joint National Committee-8 guideline. Associations with socio-demographic variables also reported. Aim being to use the study data with collated same cohort's past relevant information as primary tool to formulate burden minimisation intervention protocol of the ongoing population health Study. Design and method: Barrackpore Population Health Study, an urban household-based community cohort of 3030 households commenced in 2001. Third household survey enrolled 6632 participants (Male2576; Female 4056). Beside pre-tested structured questionnaire, real time anthropometric measurements for BMI assessment and Blood Pressure measurement termed as ‘Measured Hypertension (mHTN)’ also performed in the survey. All measurements were carried out at participants’ residence on a working day during working hours according to standard protocol. Results: Among total participants of mHTN (N6632) 31.48% were normotensive, 39.02% were prehypertensive, 20.73% were HTNstg1, 8.76% were HTNstg2. Prevalence of DDH (n = 1563) was 23.57%. Among DDH, prevalence of normotensive 12.35%, well controlled; prehypertensive 37.17%, moderately controlled; HTNstg1 33.21% and HTNstg2 17.27%, both uncontrolled. Undiagnosed HTN (n = 3174) 47.86%. of total population. Among UDH, prehypertensive 63.23%, moderately controlled; HTNstg1 26.97% and HTNstg2 9.79% not controlled. Increasing age was a higher odds of DDH [OR = 1.08, CI: 1.07,1.10; p < .0001]. Smokers were 27% [OR = 0.73, CI: 0.60, 0.89; P = 0.0019] and alcohol drinkers 47% [OR = 0.53, CI: 0.40, 0.71; p < .0001]. Compare to non-snorers, always snorers were two times [OR = 2.27, CI: 1.93,2.54; p < .0001] and diabetics were four times [OR = 4.885, CI: 4.20, 5.68; p < .0001] likely to be higher in DDH population. Conclusions: Almost half of the hypertensives remain undiagnosed. Among the diagnosed population, significant majority were not controlled. Association of age, alcohol consumption, smoking, snoring, diabetes and above normal BMI were confirmed. Monitoring of the efficacy of the burden reduction intervention program of the established longitudinal study cohort should be considered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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