Trial reportDeutsches Arzteblatt international2016
Hypertension Management in Primary Care.
Trial report in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to improve adherence to clinical practice guidelines when treating cardiovascular disease: a systematic review.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Impact of educational intervention on hypertension management by primary care physician: A randomized control trial.PEC innovation · 2024Article
- Article
- The Range and Scientific Value of Randomized Trials.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017Review
- Blood Pressure and Lifestyle.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2016Article
- In Reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo improve hypertension control, this cluster randomized trial evaluated the effectiveness of physician manager education about hypertension management.
methodsAfter randomization at practice level, primary care physicians of the intervention arm, whose practices collaborated with a university department, participated in a three-session education on evidence-based hypertensiology and practice implementation strategies. The primary outcome was blood pressure (BP) control (ambulatory blood pressure [ABP] <130/80 mmHg) after 5 months. Secondary outcomes were changes in BP and practice routines regarding hypertension management. Following an intention-to-treat approach, data analyses included crude and adjusted generalized mixed models and sensitivity analyses. These took into account sex, age, ≥ hypertension-related disease and resistant hypertension (RH).
resultsThe analysis included 103 of 169 patients from 22 practices. Overall, BP decrease was -8.2 systolic and -4.1 mmHg diastolic. The intervention had no effect on BP control (odds ratio 0.84 [95% CI 0.29-2.43]) and BP changes (interventional effect: systolic -2.48 mmHg [95% CI -7.24 to 2.29], diastolic -0.25 mmHg [95% CI 3.31 to 2.82]). Sensitivity analysis indicated effect modification in patients with RH. Intervention practices requested educational input on difficult cases, and newly implemented 3 practice strategies (14.5±2.6 versus 11.4±2.2; P=0.005).
conclusionAfter the short follow-up of 5 months, the intervention had no impact on BP control but improved the use of practice strategies.
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.