Evidence based management of hypertension: Using cardiovascular risk profiles to individualise hypertensive treatment.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. Does the routine use of global coronary heart disease risk scores translate into clinical benefits or harms? A systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2008
   Pooled it
2. Ethics of evidence based medicine in the primary care setting.Journal of medical ethics · 2004
   Review
3. Physicians' ability to predict the risk of coronary heart disease.BMC health services research · 2003
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Erratum issued

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as