MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294507377 · doi:10.26633/rpsp.2022.141

Ups and downs of hypertension control in Canada: critical factors and lessons learned

2022· article· en· W4294507377 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Panamericana de Salud Pública · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversité de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGovernment (linguistics)Psychological interventionMultidisciplinary approachPopulationControl (management)Political scienceNursingEnvironmental healthManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the leading risk for death, population control of increased blood pressure represents a major challenge for all countries of the Americas. In the early 1990's, Canada had a hypertension control rate of 13%. The control rate increased to 68% in 2010, accompanied by a sharp decline in cardiovascular disease. The unprecedented improvement in hypertension control started around the year 2000 when a comprehensive program to implement annually updated hypertension treatment recommendations started. The program included a comprehensive monitoring system for hypertension control. After 2011, there was a marked decrease in emphasis on implementation and evaluation and the hypertension control rate declined, driven by a reduction in control in women from 69% to 49%. A coalition of health and scientific organizations formed in 2011 with a priority to develop advocacy positions for dietary policies to prevent and control hypertension. By 2015, the positions were adopted by most federal political parties, but implementation has been slow. This manuscript reviews key success factors and learnings. Some key success factors included having broad representation on the program steering committee, multidisciplinary engagement with substantive primary care involvement, unbiased up to date credible recommendations, development and active adaptation of education resources based on field experience, extensive implementation of primary care resources, annual review of the program and hypertension indicators and developing and emphasizing the few interventions important for hypertension control. Learnings included the need for having strong national and provincial government engagement and support, and retaining primary care organizations and clinicians in the implementation and evaluation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.235 · 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