ReviewJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2016
SPRINT: The Study Nephrologists Might Take With a Grain of Salt.
Review in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A critical review of chronic kidney disease as a risk factor for coronary artery disease.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2021Review
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) experience several comorbidities, one of the most important being cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD). For example, patients with stage IIIa/b CKD are more likely to die from CVD than to survive to reach end-stage renal disease. Management of hypertension, a major determinant of CV outcomes and progressive renal dysfunction, remains elusively controversial in the CKD population. In an effort to clarify this, the National Institutes of Health-funded Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) compared the traditional systolic 140 mm Hg goal with a more aggressive systolic goal of 120 mm Hg in a cohort of nondiabetic patients at elevated CV risk. SPRINT showed statistically significant reductions in combined CV events across all prespecified subgroups, including patients with CKD. However, SPRINT did not systematically include CKD patients, and the CKD data are merely offered as a convenience sampling. This directly limits external generalizability to CKD patients since only approximately 30% of SPRINT patients in the 120 mm Hg arm had CKD. SPRINT reaffirms the need for blood pressure control, especially in CKD patients, but is not a sufficient standalone guideline for nephrologists treating CKD in the community. A SPRINT-style study dedicated to the CKD population would be more appropriate if traditional CKD guidelines are to be challenged conclusively.
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.