Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11849200›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2002

What benefit do patients expect from adding second and third antihypertensive drugs?

Hannah Leaman, Peter R Jackson

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Patients' expectations of medicines--a review and qualitative synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016
    Review
  3. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hannah LeamanAcademic Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Unit, Floor L, Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK.
Peter R Jackson
Royal Hallamshire Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo discover whether patients have the same expectations of benefit from taking the first and any additional drugs for the treatment of hypertension and to investigate any patient characteristics which predict willingness to take treatment.

methodsThis was an anonymous questionnaire survey carried out in a single primary care group. A random sample of patients from the practice list stratified by age and gender were surveyed to determine what benefit they required before deciding to receive first and subsequent drugs to treat hypertension. They were asked to indicate the largest number needing treatment for 5 years (NNT5) to prevent myocardial infarction in 1 (smallest benefit) that would persuade them of the need for treatment. Demographic information which might explain variability in enthusiasm for treatment was also collected. RESULTS

participantsrequired far higher benefit to consider drug treatment than expected with a mean NNT5 for the first treatment of 15.0 (95% CI 12.3, 17.8). Marginal benefit demanded for the addition of second and third treatments was at least as great with an NNT5 of 13.2 (95% CI 10.8, 15.7) and NNT5 of 11.0 (95% CI 8.6, 13.4). Additional factors influencing willingness to take treatment were gender with a difference in NNT5 between men and women of 7.1 (95% CI 1.7, 12.5), difficulty in making the decision (very easy vs very difficult) of 14.9 (95% CI 6.0, 23.8), and years in full time education 2.0 (95% CI 0.9, 3.0) for each additional year of education. Any slope of NNT5 with increasing number of tablets disappeared when gender, years in education, and difficulty in reaching a decision were taken into account simultaneously.

conclusionsPeople may have greater expectation of benefit from antihypertensive drug treatment than it provides. They certainly do not view the addition of subsequent drugs as any lesser step than starting the first in terms of the benefit expected. Full understanding of both the risks and benefits may be of critical importance with those spending longer in full time education and those expending more effort in making the decision accepting more treatment. The discrepancy between benefit expected and that available demands further research into methods of determining patients' expectations and informing individual patient decisions.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsDrug Therapy, CombinationPatient SatisfactionAdultAgedConfidence IntervalsFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID11849200
PMCPMC1874545
OpenAlexW1912060959

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.