ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2017
Blood pressure control and cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: The German T2Target registry.
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 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.
- Blood Pressure Target Achievement Under Monotheraphy: A Real-Life Appraisal.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2020Observational
- Is resistant hypertension an independent predictor of all-cause mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes? A prospective cohort study.BMC medicine · 2019Article
- Understanding of hypertension and heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes by studying effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors on plasma B-type natriuretic peptide levels.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Article
- Blood pressure control and cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: The German T2Target registry.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension is poor. It is unclear how effectively general practitioners assess and treat such patients. T2Target included hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had undergone ambulatory blood pressure monitoring within the past 3 months. Recordings were analyzed by the general practitioner and an independent center and the conclusions were compared. Nighttime hypertension was reported less frequently by the general practitioner in comparison with central assessment (43.9% vs 77.9%, P<.001), as were masked (4.0% vs 13.1%, P<.001) and isolated office (4.4% vs 8.8%, P<.001) hypertension. A total of 13.9% of patients were deemed to have controlled blood pressure (ambulatory blood pressure monitoring). For the 784 patients with uncontrolled blood pressure, 40.7% underwent no change to their antihypertensive treatment. Cardiovascular risk was underestimated, with 11.1% deemed to be at very high risk, in contrast to the 97.0% of patients by central assessment. In conclusion, blood pressure control in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is poor and not accurately assessed by office-based general practitioners, despite the use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.
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.