MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414747505 · doi:10.3390/diabetology6100107

Evaluation of Cardiovascular Risk Factor Control Among People with Diabetes in the Community Pharmacy Setting—A Descriptive Observational Study

2025· article· en· W4414747505 on OpenAlexafffund
Marian Zaki, N Mirzai, Hazel Thornton, Yazid N. Al Hamarneh, Margaret Bermingham

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaHealth Research Board
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusBlood pressureObservational studyType 2 diabetesCommunity pharmacyPharmacyRisk factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In some countries, community pharmacists provide advanced services to people with diabetes that improve glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk. This study aims to describe the cardiovascular risk profile of people with diabetes attending community pharmacy in Ireland. Methods: Data collection for this descriptive, observational, cross-sectional study took place in 10 pharmacies, in four Irish counties between July 2018 and October 2019. Participants were aged ≥18 years, with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, attending a participating pharmacy and were dispensed oral diabetes medicines, insulin, or devices for monitoring glycaemic control. Participants were asked about their demographics, medical history, and cardiovascular risk factors. Current medications were identified from dispensing software. Results: Data were available for 106 participants; 70 (66.0%) were male and 36 (34.0%) were female. The median age was 66.0 [56.5: 72.0] years. Of these, 90 (84.9%) had type 2 diabetes. Hypertension and dyslipidaemia were reported by 60 (56.6%) and 59 (55.7%) participants, respectively. Twenty-one participants (19.8%) were current smokers, 31 (29.2%) followed no specific diet, and 44 (41.5%) did not undertake exercise. Oral diabetes medication was prescribed to 85 (80.2%) and insulin was prescribed to 29 (27.4%) participants. Where an antihypertensive was prescribed, 21 participants (19.8%) achieved the systolic blood pressure on-treatment goal of ≤130 mmHg and 34 (32.1%) achieved the diastolic blood pressure on-treatment goal of <80 mmHg. Conclusions: Study participants demonstrated a high rate of characteristics associated with increased cardiovascular risk, including non-achievement of target blood pressure, smoking, and lack of exercise. A community pharmacist-led intervention aimed at potentially improving cardiovascular risk factors in people with diabetes warrants further study in an Irish setting.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetologySame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207