MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415262695 · doi:10.1161/hyp.82.suppl_1.fr477

Abstract FR477: Implementing the CDC’s Hypertension Management Program Toolkit in a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC)

2025· article· en· W4415262695 on OpenAlexaff
J. Stringer

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsTrillium Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary careDescriptive statisticsMedical prescriptionCommunity health centerDisease managementPatient careTelemedicineHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The CDC’s HTN Management Program (HMP) Toolkit provides strategies to improve HTN control rates. The study implemented components of the HMP Toolkit in a FQHC to examine the impact on HTN control. Hypothesis: Does implementing components of the HMP Toolkit over 12 weeks improve BP measurement technique, BP rechecks, SPC prescribing, and HTN control? Methods: The study took place in 2025 at a FQHC in Rochester, NY. A quantitative descriptive design was utilized and data analysis included descriptive statistics and Repeat Measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test. Components implemented: a) Patient registry/outreach Inclusion criteria (IC): 1) patients 18-85yo with a known diagnosis of HTN 2) on ≤ 2 antihypertensive medications 3) previous two BP readings ≥ 140/90 4) last visit was <12 months ago and have no visit scheduled in the next 3 months Outcomes measured: HTN Management Visit (HMV) with PharmD b) EHR Alert for repeat BP check IC: all patients seen by providers Outcomes measured: repeat BP obtained when initial BP ≥140/90 c) Education for nurses on BP measurement technique IC: all staff (MA, LPN, RN) who room patients Outcomes measured: Quick Check Assessment tool from AHA performed pre- and post-educational intervention d) Promote use of SPC to treat HTN IC: all primary care providers and PharmDs Outcomes measured: prescriptions for SPC therapy e) PharmD-led HMVs IC: patients from HTN Registry/Referrals who participated in the HMV with PharmD Outcomes measured: SBP measured pre- and post-HMV Results: a) EHR alerts for repeat BP check - Appropriate repeat BP measurement increased from 67% to > 90% (n= 670, 606 repeats performed). b) Education for nurses on BP technique - Baseline Quick Checks (n=55 observations) showed common errors and most domains improved on repeat observation (n = 45). c) Promote use of SPC - SPC prescribing doubled from baseline of 12% to 24% (n = 544 SPC prescribed). d) PharmD-led HMV - Average SBP change from the patients’ first HMV to their second HMV was -17 mm Hg with a strong statistical significance noted (p <.001). In terms of HTN control, 39% (n=10/26) reached BP ≤130/80 and 73% (n=19/26) reached BP ≤140/90. Conclusion: Implementing select components from the HMP Toolkit resulted in improved repeat BP rates, improved BP measurement technique, and increased SPC prescribing rates. Additionally, patients who participated in the PharmD-led HMVs saw an average 17 mm Hg reduction in SBP with 73% of these patients reaching target BP of ≤140/90.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207