Diagnosis and management of resistant hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resistant hypertension is defined as blood pressure that remains above the therapeutic goal despite concurrent use of at least three antihypertensive agents of different classes, including a diuretic, with all agents administered at maximum or maximally tolerated doses. Resistant hypertension is also diagnosed if blood pressure control requires four or more antihypertensive drugs. Assessment requires the exclusion of apparent treatment resistant hypertension, which is most often the result of non-adherence to treatment. Resistant hypertension is associated with major cardiovascular events in the short and long term, including heart failure, ischemic heart disease, stroke, and renal failure. Guidelines from several professional organizations recommend lifestyle modification and antihypertensive drugs. Medications typically include an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, a calcium channel blocker, and a long acting thiazide-type/like diuretic; if a fourth drug is needed, evidence supports addition of a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. After a long pause since 2007 when the last antihypertensive class was approved, several novel agents are now under active development. Some of these may provide potent blood pressure lowering in broad groups of patients, such as aldosterone synthase inhibitors and dual endothelin receptor antagonists, whereas others may provide benefit by allowing treatment of resistant hypertension in special populations, such as non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in patients with chronic kidney disease. Several device based approaches have been tested, with renal denervation being the best supported and only approved interventional device treatment for resistant hypertension.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".