Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30383082›Full record

ArticleJAMA internal medicine2018

Benefits and Harms of Antihypertensive Treatment in Low-Risk Patients With Mild Hypertension.

James P Sheppard, Sarah Stevens, Richard Stevens, Una Martin, Jonathan Mant, F D Richard Hobbs, Richard J McManus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

James P SheppardNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Sarah StevensNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Richard StevensNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Una MartinSchool of Pharmacy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Jonathan MantDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
F D Richard HobbsNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Richard J McManusNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

Department of Health 12/01/52Department of Health IS-SPC-0514-10043Department of Health NIHR-RP-02-12-015Medical Research Council MC_PC_11004Medical Research Council MR/K022032/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Evidence to support initiation of pharmacologic treatment in low-risk patients with mild hypertension is inconclusive, with previous trials underpowered to demonstrate benefit. Clinical guidelines across the world are contradictory. Objective: To examine whether antihypertensive treatment is associated with a low risk of mortality and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in low-risk patients with mild hypertension. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this longitudinal cohort study, data were extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, from January 1, 1998, through September 30, 2015, for patients aged 18 to 74 years who had mild hypertension (untreated blood pressure of 140/90-159/99 mm Hg) and no previous treatment. Anyone with a history of CVD or CVD risk factors was excluded. Patients exited the cohort if follow-up records became unavailable or they experienced an outcome of interest. Exposures: Prescription of antihypertensive medication. Propensity scores for likelihood of treatment were constructed using a logistic regression model. Individuals treated within 12 months of diagnosis were matched to untreated patients by propensity score using the nearest-neighbor method. Main Outcomes and Measures: The rates of mortality, CVD, and adverse events among patients prescribed antihypertensive treatment at baseline, compared with those who were not prescribed such treatment, using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: A total of 19 143 treated patients (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [11.8] years; 10 705 [55.9%] women; 10 629 [55.5%] white) were matched to 19 143 similar untreated patients (mean [SD] age, 54.9 [12.2] years; 10 631 [55.5%] female; 10 654 [55.7%] white). During a median follow-up period of 5.8 years (interquartile range, 2.6-9.0 years), no evidence of an association was found between antihypertensive treatment and mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02; 95% CI, 0.88-1.17) or between antihypertensive treatment and CVD (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.95-1.25). Treatment was associated with an increased risk of adverse events, including hypotension (HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.30-2.20; number needed to harm at 10 years [NNH10], 41), syncope (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.10-1.50; NNH10, 35), electrolyte abnormalities (HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.12-2.65; NNH10, 111), and acute kidney injury (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.00-1.88; NNH10, 91). Conclusions and Relevance: This prespecified analysis found no evidence to support guideline recommendations that encourage initiation of treatment in patients with low-risk mild hypertension. There was evidence of an increased risk of adverse events, which suggests that physicians should exercise caution when following guidelines that generalize findings from trials conducted in high-risk individuals to those at lower risk.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAntihypertensive AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesFemaleHumansHypertensionLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID30383082
PMCPMC6583613

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.