ArticlePloS one2019
Time to review policy on screening for, and managing, hypertension in South Africa: Evidence from primary care.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and associations of hypertension detection, treatment and control in Cape Town.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Rising prevalence, and improved but suboptimal management, of hypertension in South Africa: A comparison of two national surveys.Global epidemiology · 2021Article
- Undiagnosed Hypertension in a Workplace: The Case of a Logistics Company in Gauteng, South Africa.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Pitfalls of Single Measurement Screening for Diabetes and Hypertension in Community-Based Settings.Global heart · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent policy in South Africa requires measurement of blood pressure at every visit in primary care. The number of patients regularly visiting primary care clinics for routine care is increasing rapidly, causing long queues, and unmanageable workloads.
methodsWe used data collected during a randomised control trial in primary care clinics in South Africa to estimate how changes in policy might affect workloads and improve identification of undiagnosed hypertension.
resultsThe prevalence of raised blood pressure increased with age; 65% of individuals aged over 60 years had a raised blood pressure, and 49% of them were not on any treatment. Over three months, eight health facilities saw 8,947 individual chronic disease patients, receiving 22,323 visits from them. Of these visits, 60% were related to hypertension, with or without HIV, and a further 35% were related to HIV alone. Long waits for blood pressure checks caused friction at all levels of the clinics. Blood pressure machines frequently broke down due to heavy use, and high blood pressures readings were often ignored. If chronic disease patients without a diagnosis of hypertension had their blood pressure checked only once a year, the number of checks would be reduced by more than 80%. Individuals with hypertension had a blood pressure check on average once every 7 weeks, but South African guidelines recommend that this should be done every 3 months at most.
conclusionsThe numbers of chronic disease patients in primary care clinics in South Africa is rising rapidly. New policies for measuring blood pressure in these patients attending clinics are urgently needed.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN12128227 5th March 2014.
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.