Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29481592›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of hypertension2018

Clinical Trials of Blood Pressure Lowering and Antihypertensive Medication: Is Cognitive Measurement State-of-the-Art?

Merrill F Elias, Rachael V Torres, Adam Davey

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of hypertension, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

3 authors.

Merrill F EliasDepartment of Psychology and Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences and Engineering, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, USA.
Rachael V TorresDepartment of Kinesiology and Applied Physiology, College of Health Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA.
Adam DaveyDepartment of Behavioral Health and Nutrition, College of Health Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA.

Funding

African American Families Fighting Parental Cancer TogetherR01CA194178 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE · PI DAVEY, ADAM · 2016 to 2022
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA194178
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials of blood pressure (BP) lowering and antihypertensive medication use on cognitive outcomes have often been disappointing, reporting mixed findings and small effect sizes. We evaluate the extent to which cognitive assessment protocols used in these trials approach state-of-the-art. Overall, we find that a primary focus on cognition and the systematic selection of cognitive outcomes across trials take a backseat to other trial goals. Twelve trials investigating change in cognitive functioning were examined and none met criteria for state-of-the-art assessment, including use of at least 4 tests indexing 2 cognitive domains. Four trials investigating incident dementia were also examined. Each trial used state-of-the-art diagnostic criteria to assess dementia, although follow-up periods were relatively short, with only 2 trials lasting for at least 3 years. Weaknesses in each trial may act to obscure or weaken the positive effects of BP lowering on cognitive functioning. Improving trial designs in terms of cognitive outcomes selected and length of follow-up periods employed could lead to more promising findings. We offer logical steps to achieve state-of-the-art assessment protocols, with examples, in hopes of improving future trials.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntihypertensive AgentsCognitionDementiaHumansHypertensionAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID29481592
PMCPMC5946865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.