ReviewJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2006
Systems for care of hypertension in the United States.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Call to action on use and reimbursement for home blood pressure monitoring: a joint scientific statement from the American Heart Association, American Society Of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2008Guideline
- Optimizing combination therapy in the management of hypertension: the role of the aliskiren, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide fixed combination.Integrated blood pressure control · 2013Article
- The risks and benefits of initial irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy in patients with severe hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2009Review
- Therapeutic inertia and the Medicare crisis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Control of hypertension in recent clinical trials varies from 48% to 65%. However, in community care of hypertension in the United States, estimates of control of hypertension are far lower. The United States has no single system of care; however, several care systems can be identified for comparison, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs, managed care organizations, and the Indian Health Service. This review compares control of hypertension in certain centers in these systems with that achieved in clinical trials and in the community at large. Certain components of care systems are assessed for their contribution to the control of hypertension. The author concludes that for community control of hypertension to approach that achieved in clinical trials, the use of physician extenders, together with reduced or minimal cost of medication, improved education of providers with feedback, and computerization of management systems will be needed. In addition, specific interventions targeted to medically underserved groups will be required.
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.