MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399142814 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2024.05.012

Prevalence, Patient Awareness, Treatment, and Control of Hypertension in Canadian Adults With Common Comorbidities

2024· article· en· W4399142814 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineComorbidityHypertension treatmentControl (management)PediatricsInternal medicineBlood pressureComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Whether certain medical conditions are associated with blood pressure (BP) treatment and control is unclear. Methods: Using the Canadian Health Measures Survey (2007-2019), BP was assessed according to the presence of selected comorbidities, including prior heart attack or stroke, dyslipidemia, chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, obstructive sleep apnea, and overweight or obesity. Results: A total of 5,841,453 people, representing 23.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 21.7%-24.2%) of Canadian adults, were hypertensive. The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of having hypertension treated and controlled was higher in people with the following conditions, as compared to people without these conditions: a prior heart attack or stroke (aOR 3.15; 95% CI 2.31-4.31); dyslipidemia (aOR 2.51; 95% CI 1.96-3.21); obstructive sleep apnea (aOR 1.95; 95% CI 1.19-3.21); overweight or obesity (aOR 1.51; 95% CI 1.18-1.94); chronic kidney disease (aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.13-1.95); and diabetes (aOR 1.44; 95% CI 1.12-1.86). Individuals without any of these comorbidities were less likely to have BP that is treated and controlled (aOR 0.34; 95% CI 0.25-0.48). Moreover, the prevalence of BP treatment and control was low among many people without prior heart attack or stroke, even those with a moderate (aOR 0.25; 95% CI 0.17-0.37) or high (aOR 0.10; 95% CI 0.06-0.16) Framingham risk. Conclusions: Large differences in levels of BP control exist across comorbidity profiles, and the greatest gaps are seen in individuals without recognized comorbidities, even those who have a moderate-to-high Framingham risk. Efforts to optimize BP control and narrow care gaps, especially in individuals without recognized comorbidities, are necessary to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease and premature death in Canada.

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 score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.241 · 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