Prevalence of High Blood Pressure and Associated Factors among a Population of Apparently Healthy in-School Adolescents in Delta State, Nigeria: A Cross-Sectional Survey.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescence is a vulnerable phase when risky behaviours like smoking, poor diet, and physical inactivity set the stage for health problems like hypertension. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the prevalence of high blood pressure (HBP) and associated factors among apparently healthy inschool adolescents in Delta State, Nigeria. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among apparently healthy in-school adolescents aged 10 to 19 years, using a multi-stage random sampling technique. HBP was defined using the 2016 European Society of Hypertension Guidelines. Factors associated with HBP were determined using binary logistic regression. A p-value less than 0.05 was taken as significant. RESULTS: Of the 574 participants surveyed, 331 (57.7%) were females and 243 (42.3%) were males, with a female-to-male ratio of 1.36. The mean age of the study participants was 14.7 years. The mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure of the study participants were 118.81 (±12.703) and 70.16 (±9.972) mmHg respectively. Prehypertension and hypertension were present in 14.8% and 18.3% of the study population, respectively. Age 10-13 years (AOR = 7.70; 95% CI: 2.26-26.22; p = 0.001) and 14-16 years (AOR = 4.62; 95% CI: 1.40 -15.25; p = 0.001), upper socioeconomic status (AOR=1.19; 95% CI: 0.57-2.48; p = 0.020), and obesity (AOR = 2.14; 95% CI: 1.08-4.25; p = 0.039) were factors associated with HBP. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of hypertension among the study participants was significant. Factors associated with HBP include younger age (specifically 10-16 years old), higher socioeconomic status, and obesity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".