Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24459197›Full record

ReviewEuropean heart journal2014

Central blood pressure: current evidence and clinical importance.

Carmel M McEniery, John R Cockcroft, Mary J Roman, Stanley S Franklin, Ian B Wilkinson

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European heart journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 315 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
315citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
28.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03372616 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

coMparison Between invAsive and Non-invasive assessmenT on Blood Pressure and Cardiac Function in HealthY Participants: the MATCHY Study

TypeobservationalSponsorShanghai 10th People's HospitalRan2018 to 2018Enrolled100ConditionsHealthy VolunteerArmsInvasive left ventricular diastolic function assessment, Invasive aortic blood pressure measurement, Non-Invasive left ventricular diastolic function assessment, Non-Invasive aortic blood pressure measurement
NCT03659695 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Cardioprotective Effects of Freeze Dried Grape Powder Supplementation on Blood Pressure and Plasma Lipids/Lipoproteins: A Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ArizonaRan2020 to 2024Enrolled16ConditionsCardiovascular Risk FactorArmsGrape Powder, Placebo Powder
NCT07180147 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Arlington Longitudinal Optimal Healthy Aging Study (ALOHA)

TypeobservationalSponsorMarymount UniversityRan2025 to 2031Enrolled500ConditionsAlzheimer Disease (AD), Cardio Vascular Disease, Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), Frailty Syndrome
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

315 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 674 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. An outcome-driven threshold for pulse pressure amplification.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

255 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Carmel M McEnieryClinical Pharmacology Unit, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Box 110, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK cmm41@cam.ac.uk.
John R CockcroftDepartment of Cardiology, Wales Heart Research Institute, Cardiff CF14 4XN, UK.
Mary J RomanDivision of Cardiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Stanley S FranklinUniversity of California, UCI School of Medicine, Irvine, CA 92697-4101, USA.
Ian B WilkinsonClinical Pharmacology Unit, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Box 110, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK.
Addenbrooke's Hospital · GBUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/12/8/29377
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pressure measured with a cuff and sphygmomanometer in the brachial artery is accepted as an important predictor of future cardiovascular risk. However, systolic pressure varies throughout the arterial tree, such that aortic (central) systolic pressure is actually lower than corresponding brachial values, although this difference is highly variable between individuals. Emerging evidence now suggests that central pressure is better related to future cardiovascular events than is brachial pressure. Moreover, anti-hypertensive drugs can exert differential effects on brachial and central pressure. Therefore, basing treatment decisions on central, rather than brachial pressure, is likely to have important implications for the future diagnosis and management of hypertension. Such a paradigm shift will, however, require further, direct evidence that selectively targeting central pressure, brings added benefit, over and above that already provided by brachial artery pressure.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsAortaBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationBrachial ArteryCardiovascular DiseasesHumansHypertensionRisk AssessmentSphygmomanometersAntihypertensive AgentsAnti-hypertensive treatmentBlood pressureCardiovascular riskCentral pressure

Identifiers

PMID24459197
PMCPMC4155427
OpenAlexW1964160222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.