ReviewJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2008
Proactive compared with passive adverse event recognition: calcium channel blocker-associated edema.
Review in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence on antidepressant withdrawal: an appraisal and reanalysis of a recent systematic review.Psychological medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Leg edema with (S)-amlodipine vs conventional amlodipine given in triple therapy for hypertension: a randomized double blind controlled clinical trial.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2016Trial
- Efficacy of an amlodipine/olmesartan treatment algorithm in patients with or without type 2 diabetes and hypertension (a secondary analysis of the BP-CRUSH study).Journal of human hypertension · 2013Trial
- Blood pressure effects of high-dose amlodipine-benazepril combination in Black and White hypertensive patients not controlled on monotherapy.Drugs in R&D · 2012Trial
- Long-term efficacy of a combination of amlodipine and olmesartan medoxomil ± hydrochlorothiazide in patients with hypertension stratified by age, race and diabetes status: a substudy of the COACH trial.Journal of human hypertension · 2010Trial
- Incidence and risk factors of calcium channel blocker-related edema in hypertensive patients: A Multicenter retrospective cohort study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Clinical Perspectives and Management of Edema in Chronic Venous Disease-What about Ruscus?Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Safety and efficacy of ripasudil in Japanese patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: 12-month interim analysis of ROCK-J, a post-marketing surveillance study.BMC ophthalmology · 2020Observational
- Calcium Channel Blockers Co-prescribed with Loop Diuretics: A Potential Marker of Poor Prescribing?Drugs & aging · 2020Review
- Article
- Comparative effect of angiotensin II type I receptor blockers and calcium channel blockers on laboratory parameters in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2012Article
- Article
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
This article examines the concept of passive compared with proactive surveillance for monitoring adverse events occurring with antihypertensive medications, using the example of calcium channel blocker (CCB)-induced peripheral edema. Monitoring adverse events and clinical trial safety are important functions and dependent on investigator protocols and data and safety monitoring teams. Compared with proactive surveillance, voluntary reporting systems tend to yield a lower frequency of adverse events occurrence. Limitation of data has the potential to directly influence clinical and prescribing practices. This discussion addresses advantages of proactive surveillance accomplished by patient solicitation of adverse events and investigators' direct clinical examination. A literature search between the years 2000 and 2007 was conducted on MEDLINE for randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses reporting the incidence of dihydropyridine-associated peripheral edema. The incidence of edema was high in clinical trials in which patients were actively questioned about edema development and tended to be higher than reported in the prescribing information. The incidence of dihydropyridine CCB-induced edema appears to be dependent on the method of edema assessment.
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.