Global blood pressure screening during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from the May Measurement Month 2021 campaign
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Raised blood pressure (BP) remains the biggest risk factor contributing to the global burden of disease and mortality, despite the COVID-19 pandemic. May Measurement Month (MMM), an annual global screening campaign aims to highlight the importance of BP measurement by evaluating global awareness, treatment and control rates among adults with hypertension. In 2021, we assessed the global burden of these rates during the COVID-19 pandemic.Screening sites were set up in 54 countries between May and November 2021 and screenees were recruited by convenience sampling. Three sitting BPs were measured, and a questionnaire completed including demographic, lifestyle and clinical data. Hypertension was defined as a systolic BP at least 140 mmHg and/or a diastolic BP at least 90 mmHg (using the mean of the second and third readings) or taking antihypertensive medication. Multiple imputation was used to impute the average BP when readings were missing.Of the 642 057 screenees, 225 882 (35.2%) were classified as hypertensive, of whom 56.8% were aware, and 50.3% were on antihypertensive medication. Of those on treatment, 53.9% had controlled BP (<140/90 mmHg). Awareness, treatment and control rates were lower than those reported in MMM campaigns before the COVID-19 pandemic. Minimal changes were apparent among those testing positive for, or being vaccinated against COVID-19. Of those on antihypertensive medication, 94.7% reported no change in their treatment because of the COVID-19 pandemic.The high yield of untreated or inadequately treated hypertension in MMM 2021 confirms the need for systematic BP screening where it does not currently exist.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".