MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414258239 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.11.25335121

Using an EMR to assess pediatric blood pressure: Challenges and opportunities in a nephrology cohort

2025· preprint· en· W4414258239 on OpenAlexaff
Regan Mah, Anne Tsampalieros, Richard Webster, Ivan Terekhov, Jon Seymour, Robert L. Myette

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal function and acid-base balance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNephrologyBlood pressureCohortPrimary careMedical recordElectronic medical record

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Hypertension is a prevalent condition in the pediatric population. Diagnosis and management can be challenging due to difficulties with accurate measurement techniques and complex diagnostic criteria. The widespread adoption of electronic medical records (EMRs) has revealed their potential for improving patient care and research. This study aims to assess the clinical utility of using EMR data to enhance the identification and evaluation of children with hypertension. Objectives The primary objectives of this research project were to utilize the EMR to extract anthropometric, demographic, and blood pressure-related data from patients seen in the nephrology clinic as well as describe and evaluate trends in hypertension assessment and treatment while also identifying areas for improvement. Design We performed a single center, retrospective cohort study using EMR data. Setting Children who had their initial visit at the nephrology clinic between January 1st, 2018, and January 1st, 2022, were included in the cohort. Methods Outpatients were identified using ICD-10 codes related to nephrology diseases. The EMR was reviewed to extract anthropometric, biochemical, and blood pressure data. A blood pressure (BP) index was calculated using systolic and diastolic BP values and the 2017 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) hypertension guidelines. The primary analysis categorized BP phenotypes. A secondary analysis using EMR and chart review, assessed whether elevated BP was appropriately managed, including scheduling follow-up visits, diagnosing white-coat hypertension, or initiating pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions. Results A total of 1,469 children aged 1–18 (median age 9.8 years) were newly referred to the nephrology clinic with complete data for BP index calculation. Many children were initially diagnosed as hypertensive, but across multiple visits were normotensive. Despite being hypertensive across multiple visits, we observed that many children had missing data following EMR extraction (∼20%). Furthermore, despite meeting criteria at visit one for hypertension, many children did not have follow up visits (∼20-30%). We identified that those children presenting with isolated elevated diastolic blood pressure elevations were more likely to have fewer BP measurements and were less likely to have BP-related follow up, likely reflecting the perceived benign nature of this phenomenon. Limitations This study’s retrospective, non-randomized design limits generalizability. Conclusions This study underscores the challenges in studying pediatric hypertension using an EMR, particularly highlighting missing values and decreased measurements as problematic.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicRenal function and acid-base balanceFrench-language works237,207