The Effectiveness of Community-based Cardiovascular Risk Factors Screening Program in Rural Community Shopping Mall: Health Takes Heart Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) significantly impacts rural communities due to the high CVD prevalence rates compared with urban communities. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a community-based screening program for CVD risk factors by employing established risk factor scoring in a rural community. In this descriptive cross-sectional study, 1582 participants aged 20 and above participated in the screening program. Data was collected using a self-report questionnaire and measuring other CVD risk factors directly. The metabolic syndrome score and Framingham risk score (FRS) for 10-years of risk of developing heart attack and death were calculated for all participants. Then the level of follow-up with family physicians (FPs) following a screening program for CVD risk factors and a brief one-on-one educational intervention from a Registered Nurse to modify their risk factors was evaluated. The result revealed that 77% of the participants had 1 to 3 risk factors, and 52.7% followed up with FPs. Hypertension and abdominal obesity were the most common risk factors, with 51.1% and 55%, respectively. This study showed that 36.2% of the population had moderate to high FRS (death/MI>20%), and 30% had a high metabolic syndrome score. Community-based CVD risk factor screening successfully identified a high ratio of participants with high CVD risk factors and FRS. The screening program and educational interventions were beneficial in increasing public awareness of CVD risk factors, and a high percentage of participants with high FRS followed up with their FPs.
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 | 0.060 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".