ArticlePloS one2015
Blood Pressure Control Has Improved in People with and without Type 2 Diabetes but Remains Suboptimal: A Longitudinal Study Based on the German DIAB-CORE Consortium.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- LEADER-4: blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk: baseline data from the LEADER randomized trial.Journal of hypertension · 2016 · on this mapTrial
- Trial
- Retrospective analysis of the diagnostic spectrum of histological nephropathies from the Magdeburg kidney biopsy cohort (MD-KBC).BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Tirzepatide: A Systematic Update.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022 · on this mapReview
- Cardiovascular risk factors, living and ageing in Halle: the CARLA study.European journal of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Random-effects meta-analysis of combined outcomes based on reconstructions of individual patient data.Research synthesis methods · 2020Article
- [Blood pressure measurement in the NAKO German National Cohort (GNC) - differences in methods, distribution of blood pressure values, and awareness of hypertension compared to other population-based studies in Germany].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2020Article
- Clinical outcomes after cardiac rehabilitation in elderly patients with and without diabetes mellitus: The EU-CaRE multicenter cohort study.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2020Observational
- Social inequality and diabetes mellitus - developments over time among the adult population in Germany.Journal of health monitoring · 2019Article
- Determinants of coronary artery disease risk factor management across three world regions.Heart Asia · 2019Article
- Prevalence, Determinants, and Consequences of Vestibular Hypofunction. Results From the KORA-FF4 Survey.Frontiers in neurology · 2018Article
- Control of cardiovascular risk factors and its determinants in the general population- findings from the STAAB cohort study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2017Article
- Changes in Hypertension Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control in High-, Middle-, and Low-Income Countries: An Update.Current hypertension reports · 2016Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypertension is a very common comorbidity and major risk factor for cardiovascular complications, especially in people with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D). Nevertheless, studies in the past have shown that blood pressure is often insufficiently controlled in medical practice. For the DIAB-CARE study, we used longitudinal data based on the German DIAB-CORE Consortium to assess whether health care regarding hypertension has improved during the last decade in our participants.
methodsData of the three regional population-based studies CARLA (baseline 2002-2006 and follow-up 2007-2010), KORA (baseline 1999-2001 and follow-up 2006-2008) and SHIP (baseline 1997-2001 and follow-up 2002-2006) were pooled. Stratified by T2D status we analysed changes in frequencies, degrees of awareness, treatment and control. Linear mixed models were conducted to assess the influence of sex, age, study, and T2D status on changes of systolic blood pressure between the baseline and follow-up examinations (mean observation time 5.7 years). We included 4,683 participants aged 45 to 74 years with complete data and accounted for 1,256 participants who were lost to follow-up by inverse probability weighting.
resultsMean systolic blood pressure decreased in all groups from baseline to follow-up (e.g. - 8.5 mmHg in those with incident T2D). Pulse pressure (PP) was markedly higher in persons with T2D than in persons without T2D (64.14 mmHg in prevalent T2D compared to 52.87 mmHg in non-T2D at baseline) and did not change much between the two examinations. Awareness, treatment and control increased considerably in all subgroups however, the percentage of those with insufficiently controlled hypertension remained high (at about 50% of those with hypertension) especially in prevalent T2D. Particularly elderly people with T2D often had both, high blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg and a PP of ≥60 mmHg. Blood pressure in men had improved more than in women at follow-up, however, men still had higher mean SBP than women at follow-up.
conclusionBlood pressure management has developed positively during past years in Germany. While hypertension prevalence, awareness and treatment were substantially higher in participants with T2D than in those without T2D at follow-up, hypertension control was achieved only in about half the number of people in each T2D group leaving much room for further improvement.
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.