Addressing alcohol use among blood pressure patients in Thai primary care: Lessons from a survey-based stakeholder consultation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alcohol use is a major risk factor for noncommunicable diseases in Thailand, and one of its pathways is high blood pressure. Given that brief intervention can effectively reduce hazardous alcohol consumption, this study aimed to investigate how hypertensive patients with concomitant alcohol use are identified and treated in Thai primary care settings and what this may mean for screening and lifestyle intervention strategies. In a cross-sectional, mixed-method design, we surveyed 91 participants from three different groups of Thai stakeholders: policy- and decisionmakers; healthcare practitioners; and patients diagnosed with hypertension. Data was collected between December 2020 and May 2021. Responses were analyzed descriptively and using open coding tools to identify current practices, barriers, facilitators, and implications for interventions. All stakeholder groups regarded alcohol use as an important driver of hypertension. While lifestyle interventions among hypertensive patients were perceived as beneficial, current lifestyle support was limited. Barriers included limited resources in primary healthcare facilities, lack of continuous monitoring or follow-up, missing tools or procedures for risk assessment and lifestyle intervention, and stigmatization of alcohol use. Our results suggest that although screening for lifestyle risk factors (including alcohol use) and lifestyle interventions are not yet sufficiently established, a wide range of stakeholders still recognize the potential of interventions targeted at hazardous alcohol use among hypertensive patients. Future interventions may establish standardized assessment tools, be tailored to high-risk groups, and include electronic or remote elements.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".