Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25984791›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

Heterogeneity of prognostic studies of 24-hour blood pressure variability: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kathryn S Taylor, Carl J Heneghan, Richard J Stevens, Emily C Adams, David Nunan, Alison Ward

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Blood pressure variability: a review.Journal of hypertension · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Time-Dependent Hypotensive Effect of Aspirin in Mice.Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Role of the circadian system in cardiovascular disease.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2018
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Kathryn S TaylorNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Carl J HeneghanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Richard J StevensNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Emily C AdamsOxford University Hospitals Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.
David NunanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Alison WardNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In addition to mean blood pressure, blood pressure variability is hypothesized to have important prognostic value in evaluating cardiovascular risk. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of blood pressure variability within 24 hours. Using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library to April 2013, we conducted a systematic review of prospective studies of adults, with at least one year follow-up and any day, night or 24-hour blood pressure variability measure as a predictor of one or more of the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, all cardiovascular events, stroke and coronary heart disease. We examined how blood pressure variability is defined and how its prognostic use is reported. We analysed relative risks adjusted for covariates including the appropriate mean blood pressure and considered the potential for meta-analysis. Our analysis of methods included 24 studies and analysis of predictions included 16 studies. There were 36 different measures of blood pressure variability and 13 definitions of night- and day-time periods. Median follow-up was 5.5 years (interquartile range 4.2-7.0). Comparing measures of dispersion, coefficient of variation was less well researched than standard deviation. Night dipping based on percentage change was the most researched measure and the only measure for which data could be meaningfully pooled. Night dipping or lower night-time blood pressure was associated with lower risk of cardiovascular events. The interpretation and use in clinical practice of 24-hour blood pressure variability, as an important prognostic indicator of cardiovascular events, is hampered by insufficient evidence and divergent methodologies. We recommend greater standardisation of methods.

Indexed as

Blood PressureCircadian RhythmPhotoperiodAdultAgedAnalysis of VarianceFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID25984791
PMCPMC4435972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.