MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280565979 · doi:10.26633/rpsp.2022.54

Directrices de la Organización Mundial de la Salud del 2021 sobre el tratamiento farmacológico de la hipertensión: implicaciones de política para la Región de las Américas

2022· article· es· W4280565979 on OpenAlexaff
Norm R.C. Campbell, Mélanie Paccot, Paul K. Whelton, Sonia Y. Angell, Marc G. Jaffe, Jennifer Cohn, Alfredo Espinosa Brito, Vilma Irazola, Jeffrey Brettler, Edward J. Roccella, Javier Isaac Maldonado Figueredo, Andrés Rosende, Pedro Ordúñez

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Panamericana de Salud Pública · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineDisease controlBlood pressureDiseaseGerontologyHumanitiesInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las enfermedades cardiovasculares son la principal causa de muerte en la Región de las Américas y la hipertensión es la causa de más del 50% de ellas. En la Región, más de una cuarta parte de las mujeres adultas y cuatro de cada diez hombres adultos tienen hipertensión y su diagnóstico, tratamiento y control son deficientes. En el 2021, la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) publicó directrices actualizadas sobre el tratamiento farmacológico de la hipertensión en personas adultas. En este artículo se destaca el papel facilitador de la iniciativa mundial HEARTS de la OMS y la iniciativa HEARTS en las Américas para catalizar la implementación de estas directrices, a la vez que se proporciona asesoramiento específico sobre políticas para dicha implementación y se destaca la necesidad de adoptar un enfoque estratégico general para el control de la hipertensión. Los autores instan a quienes abogan por la salud y a los responsables de las políticas a priorizar la prevención y el control de la hipertensión para mejorar la salud y el bienestar de la población, y a reducir las disparidades de salud en relación con las enfermedades cardiovasculares dentro de la población y entre las poblaciones de la Región de las Américas.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Panamericana de Salud PúblicaSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207