MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4213416260 · doi:10.1161/jaha.121.024339

Feasibility and Short‐Term Effects of a Multi‐Component Emergency Department Blood Pressure Intervention: A Pilot Randomized Trial

2022· article· en· W4213416260 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew J. Spieker, Lyndsay A. Nelson, Russell L. Rothman, Christianne L. Roumie, Sunil Kripalani, Joseph Coco, Daniel Fabbri, Phillip D. Levy, Sean P. Collins, Tommy Wang, Dandan Liu, Candace D. McNaughton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialEmergency departmentBlood pressureIntervention (counseling)Emergency medicinePhysical therapyMedical emergencyInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Emergency department (ED) visits can be opportunities to address uncontrolled hypertension. We sought to compare short‐term blood pressure measures between the Vanderbilt Emergency Room Bundle (VERB) intervention and usual care plus education. Methods and Results We conducted a randomized trial of 206 adult patients with hypertension and elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) presenting to 2 urban emergency departments in Tennessee, USA. The VERB intervention included educational materials, a brief motivational interview, pillbox, primary care engagement letter, pharmacy resources, and 45 days of informational and reminder text messages. The education arm received a hypertension pamphlet. After 78 participants were enrolled, text messages requested confirmation of receipt. The primary clinical outcome was 30‐day SBP. The median 30‐day SBP was 122 and 126 mm Hg in the VERB and education arms, respectively. We estimated the mean 30‐day SBP to be 3.98 mm Hg lower in the VERB arm (95% CI, −2.44 to 10.4; P =0.22). Among participants enrolled after text messages were adapted, the respective median SBPs were 121 and 130 mm Hg, and we estimated the mean 30‐day SBP to be 8.57 mm Hg lower in the VERB arm (95% CI, 0.98‒16.2; P =0.027). In this subgroup, the median response rate to VERB text messages was 56% (interquartile range, [26%‒80%]). Conclusions This pilot study demonstrated feasibility and found an improvement in SBP for the subgroup for whom interactive messages were featured. Future studies should evaluate the role of interactive text messaging as part of a comprehensive emergency department intervention to improve blood pressure control. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02672787.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart Association→Same topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies→French-language works237,207→