ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2009
Time trends in the use of anti-hypertensive medications: results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Longitudinal Analysis of Long-Term Air Pollution Levels and Blood Pressure: A Cautionary Tale from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.Environmental health perspectives · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious reports have suggested that new evidence of the comparative effectiveness of different medication classes from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) does not always alter treatment decisions for first-line anti-hypertensive therapy.
objectivesTo evaluate the association of RCT evidence in December 2002 from the Anti-hypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) on use of anti-hypertensive medications in a multi-ethnic cohort.
methodsThe Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) study, a prospective cohort study of 6814 adults from four ethnic groups, had four separate assessments of drug use. Users of anti-hypertensive medications at baseline were excluded. We evaluated temporal changes in the medication class reported by new users of anti-hypertensive medications.
resultsAfter the exclusion of anti-hypertensive drug users at baseline, 32% of new users of anti-hypertensive drugs seen at exam 2 were prescribed a diuretic. The publication of ALLHAT was associated with a subsequent increase in the proportion of new users taking diuretics at exam 3 compared with exam 2 (relative risk (RR): 1.31; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-1.59). After the report from ALLHAT, the proportion of users of diuretics seen at exam 3 rose to 44% (starting in 2004) and 39% in exam 4 (starting in 2005). This increase in the proportion of diuretic use among new users of anti-hypertensive medications declined slightly but could still be detected at exam 4 as compared to exam 2 (RR: 1.28; 95%CI: 1.04-1.57).
conclusionsThe randomized trial evidence from the ALLHAT study was temporally associated with a moderate increase in diuretic use.
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.