Prevalence, Awareness and Control of Hypertension in
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Prevention and control of hypertension are critical in reducing morbidity and mortality attributable to cardiovascular diseases. Awareness of hypertension is a pre-condition for control and prevention. This study estimated the proportion of adults who were hypertensive, were aware of their hypertension and those that achieved adequate control. Methods: We conducted a community based cross sectional survey among people$15 years in Buikwe and Mukono districts of Uganda. People had their blood pressure measured and were interviewed about their social-demographic characteristics. Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure $140 mmHg, or diastolic blood pressure $90 mmHg, or previous diagnosis of hypertension. Participants were classified as hypertensive aware if they reported that they had previously been informed by a health professional that they had hypertension. Control of hypertension among those aware was if systolic blood pressure was,140 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure was,90 mmHg. Results: The age standardized prevalence of hypertension was 27.2 % (95 % CI 25.9–28.5) similar among females (27.7%) and males (26.4%). Prevalence increased linearly with age, and age effect was more marked among females. Among the hypertensive participants, awareness was 28.2 % (95 % CI 25.4–31.0) higher among females (37.0%) compared to males (12.4%). Only 9.4 % (95 % CI 7.5–11.1) of all hypertensive participants were controlled. Control was higher among females (13.2%) compared to males (2.5%). Conclusion: More than a quarter of the adult population had hypertension but awareness and control was very low. Measures are needed to enhance control, awareness and prevention of hypertension.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".