ArticleJournal of human hypertension2015
Attitudes and preferences for the clinical management of hypertension and hypertension-related cardiac disease in general practice: results of the Italian Hypertension and Heart Survey.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Attitudes and preferences for the clinical management of hypertension and hypertension-related cerebrovascular disease in the general practice: results of the Italian hypertension and brain survey.Clinical hypertension · 2017Article
- Attitudes and preferences for the clinical management of patients with hypertension and hypertension with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Italy: main results of a survey questionnaire.Internal and emergency medicine · 2015Observational
- Metabolic approaches to antihypertensive treatment in diabetic patients.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2015Article
- Cardiovascular prevention: the role of second generation of nutraceuticals.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2015Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate attitudes and preferences for the clinical management of hypertensive patients with cardiac organ disease, including left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and coronary artery disease (CAD), in Italy. A predefined 15-item questionnaire was anonymously administered to a large community sample of general practitioners (GPs) and specialised physicians between November 2012 and June 2013. Estimated prevalence of hypertension-related clinical conditions was stratified into four groups (10-20%, 20-40%, 40-50%, >50%); preferences were reported as percentage among valid answers to the survey questionnaire. A total of 1319 physicians (672 males, age 55.0 ± 7.1 years, age of medical activity 27.1 ± 7.6 years), among whom 1264 GPs and 55 specialised physicians, was included. LVH was reported to be the most frequent marker of organ damage by the majority of physicians (73.5%). LV diastolic dysfunction was reported to be relatively frequent (>40%) by more than half of the specialised physicians (58.2%) and less frequent (10-20%) by GPs (49.8%); LV systolic dysfunction, atrial fibrillation and CAD were considered to be less frequent (10-20%) by the majority of physicians (61.3, 71.6 and 53.3%, respectively). Echocardiography was the preferred diagnostic tool used to estimate LVH (76.6%). Tight blood pressure control (130/80 mm Hg) was considered to be the most appropriate by the majority of physicians, both in hypertensive patients with LVH and in those with CAD. With the well-known limitations of a cross-sectional survey, this study provides information on attitudes and preferences for the clinical management of outpatients with hypertension and high CV risk profile in general practice in Italy.
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.