ArticleAcademic pediatrics2017
Predicting Hypertension Among Children With Incident Elevated Blood Pressure.
Article in Academic pediatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Family history of arterial hypertension and central adiposity: impact on blood pressure in schoolchildren.BMC pediatrics · 2022Article
- Elevated blood pressure in youth in pediatric weight management programs in the Pediatric Obesity Weight Evaluation Registry (POWER).Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Article
- Article
- Ellisras Longitudinal Study 2017: association of hypertension with increasing levels of adiposity in 10- to 14-year-old boys and girls in the Eastern Cape (ELS 31).Cardiovascular journal of AfricaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a model to predict hypertension risk among children with incident elevated blood pressure (BP); to test the external validity of the model.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted in 3 organizations: Kaiser Permanente Colorado was the model derivation site; HealthPartners of Minnesota and Kaiser Permanente Northern California served as external validation sites. During study years 2006 through 2012, all children aged 3 through 17 years with incident elevated BP in an outpatient setting were identified. The predictor variables were demographic and clinical characteristics collected during routine care. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to predict subsequent hypertension, and diagnostic statistics were used to assess model performance.
resultsAmong 5598 subjects at the derivation site with incident elevated BP, 160 (2.9%) developed hypertension during the study period. Eight characteristics were used to predict hypertension risk: age, sex, race, BP preceding incident elevated BP, body mass index percentile, systolic BP percentile, diastolic BP percentile, and clinical setting of the incident elevated BP. At the derivation site, the model discriminated well between those at higher versus lower risk of hypertension (c-statistic = 0.77). At external validation sites, the observed risk of hypertension was higher than the predicted risk, and the model showed poor discrimination (c-statistic ranged from 0.64 to 0.67).
conclusionsAmong children with incident elevated BP, a risk model demonstrated good internal validity with respect to predicting subsequent hypertension. However, the risk model did not perform well at 2 external validation sites, which might limit transportability to other settings.
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.