ReviewCurrent hypertension reports2015
Antihypertensive therapy and the J-curve: fact or fiction?
Review in Current hypertension reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of lowering diastolic blood pressure to <80 mmHg on cardiovascular mortality and events in patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2019Pooled it
- Baseline and 7-Year longitudinal trajectories of systolic blood pressure and all-cause mortality in the elderly: A large prospective cohort study in China, 2017-2023.AIMS public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypertension is a major modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite more than five decades of hypertension treatment, there still exist both a lack of evidence and a clear consensus to answer a fundamental question: What is the optimal blood pressure target in patients with hypertension? Early epidemiologic studies suggested the notion of the lower the blood pressure, the better the outcomes; however, others have demonstrated a J-curve phenomenon with worse outcomes at both low and very high blood pressures. Although the existence of such a J-curve remains a topic of debate, there is now increasing recognition of target organ heterogeneity wherein the optimal blood pressure depends on the target organ in question. For cardiac protection, the current body of evidence does not support a systolic blood pressure goal of lower than 130-140 mmHg. For cerebrovascular protection, however, lower blood pressure seems to be better with a sustained reduction in events down to a systolic blood pressure of 110-120 mmHg. The J-curve phenomenon is therefore both fact and fiction based on the target organ in question.
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.