Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16856052›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Magnesium supplementation for the management of essential hypertension in adults.

H O Dickinson, D J Nicolson, F Campbell, J V Cook, F R Beyer, G A Ford, J Mason

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Nutraceuticals for blood pressure control in patients with high-normal or grade 1 hypertension.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2012
    Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

H O DickinsonUniversity of Newcastle, National Guideline Research & Development Unit, 21 Claremont Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne & Wear, UK NE2 4AA. heather.dickinson@newcastle.ac.uk
D J Nicolson
F Campbell
J V Cook
F R Beyer
G A Ford
J Mason
Newcastle University · GBDurham University · GBRoyal Victoria Infirmary · GBUniversity of Leeds · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpidemiological evidence on the effects of magnesium on blood pressure is inconsistent. Metabolic and experimental studies suggest that magnesium may have a role in the regulation of blood pressure.

objectivesTo evaluate the effects of magnesium supplementation as treatment for primary hypertension in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, ISI Proceedings, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, CAB abstracts, and reference lists of systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) included in the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were: 1) RCTs of a parallel or crossover design comparing oral magnesium supplementation with placebo, no treatment, or usual care; 2) treatment and follow-up >/=8 weeks; 3) participants over 18 years old, with raised systolic blood pressure (SBP) >/=140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) >/=85 mmHg; 4) SBP and DBP reported at end of follow-up. We excluded trials where: participants were pregnant; received antihypertensive medication which changed during the study; or magnesium supplementation was combined with other interventions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed trial quality. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Random effects meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses were conducted. MAIN

resultsTwelve RCTs (n=545) with eight to 26 weeks follow-up met our inclusion criteria. The results of the individual trials were heterogeneous. Combining all trials, participants receiving magnesium supplements as compared to control did not significantly reduce SBP (mean difference: -1.3 mmHg, 95% CI: -4.0 to 1.5, I(2)=67%), but did statistically significantly reduce DBP (mean difference: -2.2 mmHg, 95% CI: -3.4 to -0.9, I(2)=47%). Sensitivity analyses excluding poor quality trials yielded similar results. Sub-group analyses and meta-regression indicated that heterogeneity between trials could not be explained by dose of magnesium, baseline blood pressure or the proportion of males among the participants. AUTHORS'

conclusionsIn view of the poor quality of included trials and the heterogeneity between trials, the evidence in favour of a causal association between magnesium supplementation and blood pressure reduction is weak and is probably due to bias. This is because poor quality studies generally tend to over-estimate the effects of treatment. Larger, longer duration and better quality double-blind placebo controlled trials are needed to assess the effect of magnesium supplementation on blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsAdultBlood PressureHumansHypertensionMagnesiumRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicMagnesium

Identifiers

PMID16856052
PMCPMC13429907
OpenAlexW1606516178

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.