MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6920681192 · doi:10.60692/a9q0y-ja911

Prevalence and access to care for cardiovascular risk factors in older people in Sierra Leone: a cross-sectional survey

2020· article· en· W6920681192 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightSocioeconomic statusAnthropometryPopulationDiseaseDiabetes mellitusRural areaObesitySierra leone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Prevalence of cardiovascular disease risk factors (CVDRFs) is increasing, especially in low-income countries. In Sierra Leone, there is limited empirical data on the prevalence of CVDRFs, and there are no previous studies on the access to care for these conditions. Methods This study in rural and urban Sierra Leone collected demographic, anthropometric measurements and clinical data from randomly sampled individuals over 40 years old using a household survey. We describe the prevalence of the following risk factors: diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, overweight or obesity, smoking and having at least one of these risk factors. Cascades of care were constructed for diabetes and hypertension using % of the population with the disease who had previously been tested ('screened'), knew of their condition ('diagnosed'), were on treatment ('treated') or were controlled to target ('controlled'). Multivariable regression was used to test associations between prevalence of CVDRFs and progress through the cascade for hypertension with demographic and socioeconomic variables. In those with recognised disease who did not seek care, reasons for not accessing care were recorded. Results Of 2071 people, 49.6% (95% CI 49.3% to 50.0%) of the population had hypertension, 3.5% (3.4% to 3.6%) had diabetes, 6.7% (6.5% to 7.0%) had dyslipidaemia, 25.6% (25.4% to 25.9%) smoked and 26.5% (26.3% to 26.8%) were overweight/obese; a total of 77.1% (76.6% to 77.5%) had at least one CVDRF. People in urban areas were more likely to have diabetes and be overweight than those living in rural areas. Moreover, being female, more educated or wealthier increased the risk of having all CVDRFs except for smoking. There is a substantial loss of patients at each step of the care cascade for both diabetes and hypertension, with less than 10% of the total population with the conditions being screened, diagnosed, treated and controlled. The most common reasons for not seeking care were lack of knowledge and cost. Conclusions In Sierra Leone, CVDRFs are prevalent and access to care is low. Health system strengthening with a focus on increased access to quality care for CVDRFs is urgently needed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207