Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30315661›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2018

Survival after diagnosis of hypertension in cats attending primary care practice in the United Kingdom.

Megan Conroy, Yu-Mei Chang, Dave Brodbelt, Jonathan Elliott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Understanding the barriers to blood pressure assessment in cats.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Under pressure: A survey of Canadian veterinarians in the diagnosis and treatment of feline hypertension.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Megan ConroyDepartment of Comparative Biomedical Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3847-6202
Yu-Mei ChangResearch Support Office, Royal Veterinary College, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6388-9626
Dave BrodbeltVeterinary Epidemiology, Economics and Public Health, Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield, United Kingdom.
Jonathan ElliottDepartment of Comparative Biomedical Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Ceva Santé Animale
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHypertension is common in older cats. There is limited evidence for predictors of survival after diagnosis. HYPOTHESIS/

objectivesInvestigate blood pressure assessment (BPA) and hypertension diagnosis in cats attending UK primary care practices (PCPs) and factors that influence survival. ANIMALS: Cats (347 889) attending 244 UK PCPs enrolled in the VetCompass program between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2013. Cats identified as hypertensive (282) were included in descriptive and survival analyses.

methodsAll electronic patient records (EPRs) were searched to identify cats that potentially had received BPA. EPRs were read in detail to identify those that had BPA. The proportion that received BPA was evaluated using a stratified analysis and the incidence of hypertension estimated. A retrospective cohort study was used to investigate survival after diagnosis (Cox proportional hazard model).

resultsEstimated incidence risk was 19.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.5-21.6) from the estimated 1.34% (1.30%-1.38%) of cats that received BPA. Few cats had BPA more than once after diagnosis (median, 1; interquartile range [IQR], 0-3), with only 9.9% of diagnosed hypertensive cats having urine protein:creatinine ratio determined. Cats diagnosed as a result of monitoring of pre-existing disease had improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.89; P = .01) compared to cats diagnosed after clinical signs were recognized. Cats that had an amlodipine dose change had improved survival (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87; P = .01) compared to those with no dose change. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: These data suggest improved blood pressure monitoring in clinical practice may decrease the morbidity associated with hypertension.

Indexed as

Age FactorsAnimalsCat DiseasesCatsFemaleHypertensionIncidenceMaleProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSurvival AnalysisUnited KingdomVeterinary Medicineblood pressurefelineprognosisVetCompass

Identifiers

PMID30315661
PMCPMC6271307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.