MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

COMMUNITY PHARMACY-BASED HYPERTENSION SCREENING: MAY MEASUREMENT MONTH 2023 IN 3 CANADIAN PROVINCES

2024· article· en· W4398209421 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ross T. Tsuyuki, Stephanie C. Gysel, Tiffany Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacyCommunity pharmacyFamily medicineTraditional medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Elevated blood pressure (BP) is the largest contributing risk factor for premature death and disability. Approximately 50% of individuals with hypertension are unaware they have the condition; therefore, BP screening is essential. Canadian health professionals have previously participated in the annual global BP screening campaign, May Measurement Month (MMM); however this has never been completed in community pharmacies, which have the advantage of being highly accessible to the public. Our objective was to examine the prevalence of elevated (BP) in Alberta (AB), British Columbia (BC), Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) during MMM 2023. Design and method: This cross-sectional study enrolled consenting members of the general public 18 years of age, recruited through signage, media and social media. Data collection took place between May 1 and July 31, 2023 in 52 community pharmacies across AB, BC, and NL. Participants completed a questionnaire that included demographic information, medical history, and use of antihypertensives. Pharmacy personnel completed 3 blood pressure readings, with readings 2 and 3 used to estimate BP. We used an automated blood pressure device recommended by Hypertension Canada's Device Recommendation Program. Elevated BP was defined as >140/90mmHg or >130/80mmHg for individuals with diabetes. Results: We enrolled 736 participants. The mean age of participants was 52 (SD 18.6) years, 66% were female, 34% had a history of hypertension, and 14% had diabetes. Overall, 21% (152/733) had elevated BP. In subgroups of interest, elevated BP was found in 20% (96/480) of females, 35% (88/251) of those with a history of hypertension (13% (64/482) in those with no history of hypertension), and 52% (53/103) in those with diabetes. Conclusions: Identifying individuals with elevated BP is the starting point for better BP management. Community pharmacy screening of BP was effective in identifying individuals with elevated BP warranting further assessment. Our experiences from MMM 2023 will guide the future scale-up of a national community pharmacy-based screening program for MMM 2024.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.062 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207