L’hypertension artérielle à Dakar : prévalence, connaissance, traitement et contrôle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension, and its risk factors in Dakar. Six hundred people aged 20 and older, living in the city of Dakar were interviewed. This sample was constructed using the combined quota method in order to strive to representativeness of the target population. Prevalence of hypertension was 27.50%. Quarter of those suffering from high blood pressure were aware of their problem, and among the latter, 61% said they were on treatment. However, of these, only 32% had controlled arterial blood pressure, that is less than 6% of those suffering from hypertension. Two factors were associated with hypertension, awareness, and treatment: age and the frequency of doctor visits. These results indicate that hypertension already constitutes a major health concern in the Senegalese capital. Detection can be considerably improved given that only a quarter of the hypertensives are aware of this problem. Compliance with treatments also appears particularly problematic. Public health policies should be quickly set up to minimize the consequences of this emerging burden.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".