ArticleResearch square2025
Bayesian and Probit comparative analysis of risk factors for high blood pressure among adults in Kassena-Nankana Districts, Ghana: An AWI-Gen sub-study.
Article in Research square, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Hypertension prevalence is rising in rural Ghana, but risk factor identification is constrained by methodological limitations in sparse data.This study comparatively applied frequentist (Probit) and Bayesian models in identifying hypertension risk factors and evaluating consistency and uncertainty quantification. Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of 2,010 adults in the Kassena-Nankana districts. Ordered Probit and Bayesian models were used to assess associations between socio-demographic, behavioral and blood pressure variables. Model fit was compared via AIC/BIC. Results: The prevalence of hypertension in the study population was 21.9Model comparison showed the ordered Probit model had superior fit (AIC/BIC: 4644.8/4734.2) to the Bayesian model (AIC/BIC: 5137.5/5165.2). Both models consistently identified male sex (Probit β=0.309, p<0.001; Bayesian mean β=0.264, 95% CrI: 0.15-0.34), older age (55-60 years: Probit β=0.514, p<0.001; Bayesian β=0.499, 95% CrI: 0.41-0.58), and higher BMI (Probit β=0.052, p<0.001; Bayesian β=0.052, 95% CrI: 0.04-0.07) as significant risk factors. However, the Bayesian model showed greater uncertainty for marital status (β=0.272, 95% CrI: -0.08-0.56) and smoking (β=-0.260, 95% CrI: -0.29 - -0.01) compared to the Probit model. Both models revealed an inverse association of smoking with hypertension, while pesticide exposure showed conflicting directions and this warrants further investigation. Conclusion: Male sex, older age, and higher BMI were consistent predictors of hypertension. Inverse associations with smoking and conflicting effects of pesticide exposure warrant further investigation. These findings highlight the need for targeted, context-specific interventions in rural Ghana. While the Probit model demonstrated a better fit, the Bayesian approach provided deeper insight into uncertainty within sparse subgroups, supporting their complementary use in hypertension research, especially in resource-limited settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.