MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Screening Rates for Primary Aldosteronism Among Individuals With Hypertension Plus Hypokalemia: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

2021· article· en· W3206257953 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesOttawa HospitalUniversité LavalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsPrimary aldosteronismHypokalemiaRetrospective cohort studySecondary hypertensionCohort studyPopulationCohortHyperaldosteronism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary aldosteronism is a common, yet highly underdiagnosed, cause of hypertension that leads to disproportionately high rates of cardiovascular disease. Hypertension plus hypokalemia is a guideline-recommended indication to screen for primary aldosteronism, yet the uptake of this recommendation at the population level remains unknown. We performed a population-based retrospective cohort study of adults ≥18 years old in Ontario, Canada, with hypertension plus hypokalemia (potassium <3.5 mEq/L) from 2009 to 2015 with follow-up through 2017. We measured the proportion of individuals who underwent primary aldosteronism screening via the aldosterone-to-renin ratio based upon hypokalemia frequency and severity along with concurrent antihypertensive medication use. We assessed clinical predictors associated with screening via Cox regression. The cohort included 26 533 adults of which only 422 (1.6%) underwent primary aldosteronism screening. When assessed by number of instances of hypokalemia over a 2-year time window, the proportion of eligible patients who were screened increased only modestly from 1.0% (158/15 983) with one instance to 4.8% (71/1494) with ≥5 instances. Among individuals with severe hypokalemia (potassium <3.0 mEq/L), only 3.9% (58/1422) were screened. Among older adults prescribed ≥4 antihypertensive medications, only 1.0% were screened. Subspecialty care with endocrinology (hazard ratio [HR], 1.52 [95% CI, 1.10-2.09]), nephrology (HR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.07-1.91]), and cardiology (HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.14-1.70]) were associated with an increased likelihood of screening, whereas age (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.94-0.96]) and diabetes (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.50-0.89]) were inversely associated with screening. In conclusion, population-level uptake of guideline recommendations for primary aldosteronism screening is exceedingly low. Increased education and awareness are critical to bridge this gap.

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)0.004
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 score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations98
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207