ReviewJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2006
Is new-onset diabetes of clinical significance in treated hypertensive patients?--Con.
Review in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antihypertensive medications: benefits of blood pressure lowering and hazards of metabolic effects.Expert review of cardiovascular therapy · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is little doubt that diabetes is more common in hypertensive than normotensive individuals. There are also some data suggesting that the use of certain antihypertensive agents, i.e., diuretics and more specifically some beta blockers will increase the occurrence of new onset diabetes (NOD) when compared to other medications, especially angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. The clinical significance of this 1%-3.5% difference, however, has not been established. Different studies report different outcomes. In large outcome trials the occurrence of NOD did not effect mortality or morbidity outcomes. Although one study reported that NOD had the same prognosis as pretreatment diabetes, another did not. At present, data are insufficient to suggest that NOD is of important clinical significance or that present treatment recommendations, especially regarding the use of diuretics, should be changed.
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.