MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk of Hypertension During Development in Information Technology

2023· book-chapter· en· W4365140352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shagufta Naz, Wajeeha Salamat, Saima Sharif

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in information quality and management · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseMedicineObesityMarital statusPhysical activityWork (physics)Quarter (Canadian coin)GerontologyEnvironmental healthPhysical therapyInternal medicineGeographyEngineeringPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advancement in information technology is the need of time, and its importance cannot be ignored. People can do online shopping, pay bills, and buy groceries in just a few minutes. Lifestyle patterns and mentalities of people have also changed. People are fascinated by information technology, but it cannot deny the importance of health-related issues. From past to current time, the rate of hypertension has greatly increased. It is reported that by 2050 there will be one quarter of people affected with hypertension. Hypertension is not just a disease, but it may cause several other diseases like cardiovascular disease and renal disorder. There are several risk factors for hypertension including lifestyle, age, marital status, employment, cardiovascular (CV) complications, obesity, work history, and physical activity. The people demand ease from the developing world with little activity; they should also increase physical activity. Proper diagnosis of hypertension and taking proper treatment steps can reduce its prevalence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in information quality and managementSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207