ArticleJournal of human hypertension2016
Microalbuminuria in subjects with hypertension attending specialist blood pressure clinics.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Observational Registry to Assess Urinary Albumin Evolution in Saudi Hypertensive Patients with the Current Treatment Local algorithm: Results of the RATIONAL Study.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2020Article
- Cross-sectional and longitudinal assessments of risk factors associated with hypertension and moderately increased albuminuria comorbidity in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 9-year open cohort study.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2019Article
- Urinary Biomarkers KIM-1 and NGAL for Detection of Chronic Kidney Disease of Uncertain Etiology (CKDu) among Agricultural Communities in Sri Lanka.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Albuminuria is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and target organ damage in patients with diabetes mellitus. In nondiabetic hypertensive patients, the threshold at which microalbuminuria (MAU) increases risk is unclear and there is evidence that cardiovascular risk may be increased in individuals with MAU levels lower than the usual recommended screening thresholds. We compared two definitions of MAU (on the basis of three early morning urine samples) in a cohort of hypertensive patients attending two specialist clinics in Scotland: conventional (MAU(C)) albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) >2.5-25 mg mmol(-1) in males or >3.5-25 mg mmol(-1) in females; and low-grade (MAU(L)) ACR 1.2-2.5 in males or 1.7-3.5 mg mmol(-1) in females. Of the 1059 subjects screened, 786 (74%) were nondiabetic, with estimated glomerular filtration rate ⩾30 ml min(-1) per 1.73 m(2) and without gross proteinuria (low-risk subset). The average age was 58±15 years, body mass index 30±6 kg m(-2) and 46% were males. The prevalence of MAU(C) was 11% and 9.5% in the overall and low-risk subset, respectively, whereas MAU(L) prevalence was 11.1% and 10% respectively. The prevalence of cardiovascular disease was higher (24%) with albuminuria (both MAU(C) and MAU(L)) compared with 14% among those without albuminuria. The use of MAU(L) doubled the number of hypertensive subjects with increased cardiovascular risk who can be targeted for more rigorous risk reduction strategies. Consideration should be given to reducing the current threshold for MAU.
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.