ReviewDer Internist2009
[Stroke and hypertension].
Review in Der Internist, 2009. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Continuous noninvasive blood pressure estimation using tissue blood flow measured by diffuse correlation spectroscopy.APL bioengineering · 2025Article
- Article
- Irregularities of Coagulation in Hypertension.Current hypertension reports · 2023Review
- Geometric Features of the Pial Arteriolar Networks in Spontaneous Hypertensive Rats: A Crucial Aspect Underlying the Blood Flow Regulation.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Evaluation of prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time in hypertensive patients attending a tertiary hospital in calabar, Nigeria.Advances in hematology · 2014Article
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
Arterial hypertension is the most important risk factor for stroke. Many interventional trials have unambiguously proven the benefit of antihypertensive therapy in both primary and secondary prevention for all age categories. No recommendation for any single antihypertensive substance for the primary prevention of stroke exists. Achieving the therapeutic goal (normotension) is the crucial factor. In most patients, multiple combinations of antihypertensive drugs are required to do this. For high-risk patients and in secondary prevention, substances inhibiting the renin-angiotensin-system, especially combined with calcium antagonists and indapamid, may be advantageous, while beta-blockers appear to be less well suited. In patients suffering from left-ventricular hypertrophy or atrial fibrillation, sartanes are the best-documented drug class. As TIA or stroke will often disturb the normal circadian rhythm of blood pressure and eliminate the usual night-time drop, monitoring of the therapeutic results must include ambulatory 24h measurements. The interrelation between vascular dementia and hypertension is by now also considered proven. An early start of antihypertensive treatment can prevent the development of dementia and impaired cognitive function.
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.