Trial reportJAMA2016
Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control and Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes in Adults Aged ≥75 Years: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01206062 (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 549 papers, 18 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.
Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial
Who cites it
549 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,223 citations in OpenAlex.
- Planned Antihypertensive Deprescribing in Long-Term Care Residents: A Systematic Review of Randomized Evidence.Drugs & aging · 2026Pooled it
- The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension 2025 (JSH2025).Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Guideline
- Efficacy and safety of intensive vs. standard blood pressure control: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Hypertension and frailty in older adults: a bibliometric analysis and knowledge mapping based on Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed (1973-2025).Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Targeting a systolic blood pressure of <130 mmHg is beneficial in adults with hypertension aged ≥75 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Pooled it
- European guidelines for hypertension in 2024: a comparison of key recommendations for clinical practice.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2025Guideline
- Effect of intensive versus standard blood pressure control on cardiovascular outcomes in adult patients with hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Intensive Antihypertensive Treatment Goals: Brazilian Society of Cardiology (SBC) Recommendation.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Pooled it
- The effects of diuretic deprescribing in adult patients: A systematic review to inform an evidence-based diuretic deprescribing guideline.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Assessing Frailty-Specific Treatment Effect in Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review.Drugs & aging · 2024Pooled it
- Frailty as an Effect Modifier in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Hypertension Guideline and Blood Pressure in Older Adults.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023Guideline
- Hypertension Treatment in Frail Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Appraisal of Guidelines.Drugs & aging · 2023Pooled it
- Intensive versus standard blood pressure control in older persons with or without diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Blood pressure targets for the treatment of people with hypertension and cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Intensive Blood Pressure Treatment Goals: Evidence for Cardiovascular Protection From Observational Studies and Clinical Trials.American journal of hypertension · 2022Pooled it
- An updated systematic review on heart failure treatments for patients with renal impairment: the tide is not turning.Heart failure reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Disentangling the varying associations between systolic blood pressure and health outcomes in the very old: an individual patient data meta-analysis.Journal of hypertension · 2022Pooled it
- Heart Stress and Blood Pressure Management in Older Adults: Post Hoc Analysis of the ASPREE Trial.Circulation · 2025Trial
- Changes in frailty, intensive blood pressure treatment, and risks of adverse clinical outcomes: a post hoc analysis of the SPRINT trial.BMC medicine · 2025Trial
489 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
26 authors at 17 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
importanceThe appropriate treatment target for systolic blood pressure (SBP) in older patients with hypertension remains uncertain.
objectiveTo evaluate the effects of intensive (<120 mm Hg) compared with standard (<140 mm Hg) SBP targets in persons aged 75 years or older with hypertension but without diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsA multicenter, randomized clinical trial of patients aged 75 years or older who participated in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). Recruitment began on October 20, 2010, and follow-up ended on August 20, 2015.
interventionsParticipants were randomized to an SBP target of less than 120 mm Hg (intensive treatment group, n = 1317) or an SBP target of less than 140 mm Hg (standard treatment group, n = 1319). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary cardiovascular disease outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome not resulting in a myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal acute decompensated heart failure, and death from cardiovascular causes. All-cause mortality was a secondary outcome.
resultsAmong 2636 participants (mean age, 79.9 years; 37.9% women), 2510 (95.2%) provided complete follow-up data. At a median follow-up of 3.14 years, there was a significantly lower rate of the primary composite outcome (102 events in the intensive treatment group vs 148 events in the standard treatment group; hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85]) and all-cause mortality (73 deaths vs 107 deaths, respectively; HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49-0.91]). The overall rate of serious adverse events was not different between treatment groups (48.4% in the intensive treatment group vs 48.3% in the standard treatment group; HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.89-1.11]). Absolute rates of hypotension were 2.4% in the intensive treatment group vs 1.4% in the standard treatment group (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 0.97-3.09]), 3.0% vs 2.4%, respectively, for syncope (HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.76-2.00]), 4.0% vs 2.7% for electrolyte abnormalities (HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 0.99-2.33]), 5.5% vs 4.0% for acute kidney injury (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.98-2.04]), and 4.9% vs 5.5% for injurious falls (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.65-1.29]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among ambulatory adults aged 75 years or older, treating to an SBP target of less than 120 mm Hg compared with an SBP target of less than 140 mm Hg resulted in significantly lower rates of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events and death from any cause.
trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.
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.