ReviewVascular health and risk management2012
Proof of concept in cardiovascular risk: the paradoxical findings in blood pressure and lipid abnormalities.
Review in Vascular health and risk management, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Blood pressure-lowering effect of simvastatin: a placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial with 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.Journal of human hypertension · 2014 · on this mapTrial
- The association between high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and blood pressure in Yi people.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Article
- Blood pressure lowering effect of Ficus deltoidea var kunstleri in spontaneously hypertensive rats: possible involvement of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, endothelial function and anti-oxidant system.Molecular biology reports · 2019Article
- Blood pressure variability and its association with echocardiographic parameters in hypertensive diabetic patients.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2016Article
- Influence of weight status on physical and mental health in Moroccan perimenopausal women.The Pan African medical journal · 2016Article
- Preventing the progression of prehypertension to hypertension: role of antihypertensives.Current hypertension reports · 2015Review
- Blood pressure targets in the treatment of high blood pressure: a reappraisal of the J-shaped phenomenon.Journal of human hypertension · 2014Review
- Understanding the evolution of multimorbidity: evidences from the North West Adelaide Health Longitudinal Study (NWAHS).PloS one · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High blood pressure and lipoprotein abnormalities were identified by many cohort studies as the major risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Laboratory experiments apparently confirmed their role in the causation of atherosclerosis, but a proof of concept requires the corroboration by clinical trials in human beings. The size of benefit in clinical trials regarding the control of high blood pressure was within the estimations of risk provided by cohort studies. For a reduction of 10 mmHg in systolic blood pressure or 5 mmHg in diastolic blood pressure, the relative risk reduction of coronary heart disease was 22% (95% confidence interval 27%-17%) in a meta-analysis of clinical trials, close to the estimation of reduction of 25% (95% confidence interval 23%-27%) provided by a meta-analysis of cohort studies. The corresponding values for stroke were 41% (95% confidence interval 33%-48%) in clinical trials compared to a cohort risk prediction of 36% (95% confidence interval 34%-38%). This efficacy was shared by all blood pressure-lowering drugs. The same figure has not paradoxically happened with drugs that act over abnormalities of cholesterol and lipoproteins. Only statins, which have other beneficial actions as well, have consistently lowered the incidence of cardiovascular diseases, an efficacy that was not reproduced by older and newer quite potent lipid drugs. The adverse effects of these drugs may nullify their beneficial effects over lipoproteins and abnormalities of lipoproteins may only be surrogate markers of the underlying real risks.
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.