SynthesisJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2019
Paucity of high-quality studies reporting on salt and health outcomes from the science of salt: A regularly updated systematic review of salt and health outcomes (April 2017 to March 2018).
Synthesis in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Further evidence that methods based on spot urine samples should not be used to examine sodium-disease relationships from the Science of Salt: A regularly updated systematic review of salt and health outcomes (November 2018 to August 2019).Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2020Pooled it
- Science of Salt: A regularly updated systematic review of salt and health outcomes studies (April to October 2018).Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Pooled it
- Paucity of high-quality studies reporting on salt and health outcomes from the science of salt: A regularly updated systematic review of salt and health outcomes (April 2017 to March 2018).Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Pooled it
- The Science of Salt: A global review on changes in sodium levels in foods.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this review is to identify, summarize, and critically appraise studies on dietary salt and health outcomes that were published from April 2017 to March 2018. The search strategy was adapted from a previous systematic review on dietary salt and health. Identified studies were screened based on a priori defined criteria to identify publications eligible for detailed critical appraisals. Overall, 6747 citations were identified by the search strategy, and 42 health outcome studies were identified. Three of the 42 studies met the criteria for methodological quality and health outcomes and underwent detailed critical appraisals and commentary. In addition, a systematic review and meta-analysis was critically appraised, although it did not strictly meet our methodological criteria. All four of the studies critically appraised found that sodium reduction improved blood pressure, especially in individuals with hypertension. In addition, sodium reduction reduced albuminuria in patients with stage 1-3 chronic kidney disease. Examination of the time course of blood pressure responses to sodium reduction revealed lowering sodium in the context of an average American diet may not produce maximal blood pressure reductions within a 4-week intervention period. This review provides further evidence of the benefit of sodium reduction for blood pressure lowering and gives insights into the subgroups of the population that may derive the greatest benefit from sodium reduction and the time course required to see benefit. Only three high-quality studies were identified during this 12-month review period, highlighting the critical need for more well-conducted rigorous studies in this area.
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.