Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10678593›Full record

ReviewDrugs2000

Pharmacoeconomic considerations in the management of hypertension.

H Pardell, R Tresserras, P Armario, R Hernández del Rey

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Economic aspects of hypertension treatment in Poland.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2014
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

H PardellDepartment of Internal Medicine, Consortium of the Red Cross Hospital, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.
R Tresserras
P Armario
R Hernández del Rey

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hypertension is highly prevalent in developed and developing countries (more than 30% of the adult population when a threshold value of 140/90 mm Hg is selected). It constitutes one of the major cardiovascular risk factors and accounts for more than 5% of total deaths worldwide. The economic impact of hypertension is enormous, representing $US23.74 billion in the US in 1995 and approximately $US1685 million in Spain in 1994. Direct costs amount to more than 50% of the total costs of hypertension, and almost 70% of these are attributable to drug treatment. Furthermore, hypertensive patients use medical services 50% more than normotensive individuals, and hypertension represents one of the 3 leading causes of visits to primary healthcare centres. When considering the cost effectiveness of hypertension treatment, there is no doubt that it is cost effective in comparison with other interventions, although some controversies exist, mainly with respect to mild-to-moderate hypertension and to the long term versus short term benefits. The controversy about the absolute risk of hypertension influences the cost-effectiveness analysis. Because of the limitations of the available cost-effectiveness analyses, it is currently impossible to recommend the use of any particular antihypertensive drug for all patients with hypertension. Consequently, the choice of antihypertensive in any patient should be guided by clinical experience and the recommendations of the present international guidelines.

Indexed as

AdultAntihypertensive AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisEconomics, PharmaceuticalHumansHypertensionAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.