ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2007
Choice of first antihypertensive--are existing guidelines ignored?
Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Goal attainment, medication adherence and guideline adherence in the treatment of hypertension and dyslipidemia in Irish populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2025Review
- Adherence to national guidelines for initiation of antiretroviral regimens in HIV patients: a Danish nationwide study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2011Article
- Hypertension guideline adherence among nursing home patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2009Article
- Choice of first antihypertensive - are existing guidelines ignored? Response to Vegter & de Jong-van den Berg.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2008Article
- Choice of first antihypertensive--comparison between the Irish and Dutch setting.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo determine adherence to hypertension guidelines in relation to age and diabetes.
methodsThe Irish HSE-PCRS prescribing database identified patients initiating antihypertensive monotherapy in 2005. Logistic regression predicted the likelihood of therapy according to guidelines.
resultsThe odds ratio (OR) of receiving therapies according to the guideline recommendations in those <55 years vs. > or =55 years was 1.31 (95% CI 1.26, 1.37). Diabetics were more likely than nondiabetics to receive antihypertensives other than beta-adrenoceptor blockers (OR 2.97, 95% CI 2.74, 3.21).
conclusionsOur findings show some adherence to the guidelines in relation to age but selective prescribing of antihypertensives for diabetics.
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.