Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31164039›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2019

Long-Term Exposure to Elevated Systolic Blood Pressure in Predicting Incident Cardiovascular Disease: Evidence From Large-Scale Routine Electronic Health Records.

Jose Roberto Ayala Solares, Dexter Canoy, Francesca Elisa Diletta Raimondi, Yajie Zhu, Abdelaali Hassaine, Gholamreza Salimi-Khorshidi, Jenny Tran, Emma Copland, Mariagrazia Zottoli, Ana-Catarina Pinho-Gomes and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Elevated blood pressure, antihypertensive medications and bone health in the population: revisiting old hypotheses and exploring future research directions.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jose Roberto Ayala Solares1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Dexter Canoy1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Francesca Elisa Diletta Raimondi1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Yajie Zhu1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Abdelaali Hassaine1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Gholamreza Salimi-Khorshidi1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Jenny Tran1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Emma Copland1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Mariagrazia Zottoli1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Ana-Catarina Pinho-Gomes1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Milad Nazarzadeh1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.
Kazem Rahimi1 Deep Medicine Oxford Martin School Oxford United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background How measures of long-term exposure to elevated blood pressure might add to the performance of "current" blood pressure in predicting future cardiovascular disease is unclear. We compared incident cardiovascular disease risk prediction using past, current, and usual systolic blood pressure alone or in combination. Methods and Results Using data from UK primary care linked electronic health records, we applied a landmark cohort study design and identified 80 964 people, aged 50 years (derivation cohort=64 772; validation cohort=16 192), who, at study entry, had recorded blood pressure, no prior cardiovascular disease, and no previous antihypertensive or lipid-lowering prescriptions. We used systolic blood pressure recorded up to 10 years before baseline to estimate past systolic blood pressure (mean, time-weighted mean, and variability) and usual systolic blood pressure (correcting current values for past time-dependent blood pressure fluctuations) and examined their prospective relation with incident cardiovascular disease (first hospitalization for or death from coronary heart disease or stroke/transient ischemic attack). We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios and applied Bayesian analysis within a machine learning framework in model development and validation. Predictive performance of models was assessed using discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and calibration metrics. We found that elevated past, current, and usual systolic blood pressure values were separately and independently associated with increased incident cardiovascular disease risk. When used alone, the hazard ratio (95% credible interval) per 20-mm Hg increase in current systolic blood pressure was 1.22 (1.18-1.30), but associations were stronger for past systolic blood pressure (mean and time-weighted mean) and usual systolic blood pressure (hazard ratio ranging from 1.39-1.45). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for a model that included current systolic blood pressure, sex, smoking, deprivation, diabetes mellitus, and lipid profile was 0.747 (95% credible interval, 0.722-0.811). The addition of past systolic blood pressure mean, time-weighted mean, or variability to this model increased the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% credible interval) to 0.750 (0.727-0.811), 0.750 (0.726-0.811), and 0.748 (0.723-0.811), respectively, with all models showing good calibration. Similar small improvements in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were observed when testing models on the validation cohort, in sex-stratified analyses, or by using different landmark ages (40 or 60 years). Conclusions Using multiple blood pressure recordings from patients' electronic health records showed stronger associations with incident cardiovascular disease than a single blood pressure measurement, but their addition to multivariate risk prediction models had negligible effects on model performance.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesCohort StudiesElectronic Health RecordsFemaleForecastingHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentTime Factorscardiovascular diseaseelectronic health recordshigh blood pressurehypertensionrisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID31164039
PMCPMC6645648

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.