Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27095510›Full record

SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2016

Systematic review and meta-analysis of music interventions in hypertension treatment: a quest for answers.

Anne Y R Kühlmann, Jonathan R G Etnel, Jolien W Roos-Hesselink, Johannes Jeekel, Ad J J C Bogers, Johanna J M Takkenberg

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Effect of Music on Livestock: Cattle, Poultry and Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Review
  13. Brazilian Guidelines of Hypertension - 2020.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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.

Anne Y R KühlmannDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jonathan R G EtnelDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, 3000CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jolien W Roos-HesselinkDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Johannes JeekelDepartment of Neuroscience, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ad J J C BogersDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, 3000CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Johanna J M TakkenbergDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, 3000CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. j.j.m.takkenberg@erasmusmc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse effects, treatment resistance and high costs associated with pharmacological treatment of hypertension have led to growing interest in non-pharmacological complementary therapies such as music interventions. This meta-analysis aims to provide an overview of reported evidence on the efficacy of music interventions in the treatment of hypertension.

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted for publications on the effect of music interventions on blood pressure in adult hypertensive subjects published between January 1990-June 2014. Randomized controlled trials with a follow-up duration ≥28 days were included. Blood pressure measures were pooled using inverse variance weighting.

resultsOf the 1689 abstracts reviewed, 10 randomized controlled trials were included. Random-effects pooling of the music intervention groups showed a trend toward a decrease in mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) from 144 mmHg(95 % CI:137-152) to 134 mmHg(95 % CI:124-144), and in mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from 84 mmHg(95 % CI:78-89) to 78 mmHg(95 % CI:73-84). Fixed-effect analysis of a subgroup of 3 trials with valid control groups showed a significant decrease in pooled mean SBP and DBP in both intervention and control groups. A comparison between music intervention groups and control groups was not possible due to unavailable measures of dispersion.

conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis revealed a trend towards a decrease in blood pressure in hypertensive patients who received music interventions, but failed to establish a cause-effect relationship between music interventions and blood pressure reduction. Considering the potential value of this safe, low-cost intervention, well-designed, high quality and sufficiently powered randomized studies assessing the efficacy of music interventions in the treatment of hypertension are warranted.

Indexed as

Blood PressureMusic TherapyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeGlobal health care deliveryHypertensionMeta-analysisMusic interventionSystemic review

Identifiers

PMID27095510
PMCPMC4837643

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.