ArticleJournal of global health2019
Development and validation of prediction models for hypertension risks in rural Chinese populations.
Article in Journal of global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prognostic risk models for incident hypertension: A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Machine Learning for Hypertension Prediction: a Systematic Review.Current hypertension reports · 2022Pooled it
- Prediction of hypertension using traditional regression and machine learning models: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Development and validation of a population-based prediction model for prevalent hypertension: evidence from Qatar biobank.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Controversy in Hypertension: Pro-Side of the Argument Using Artificial Intelligence for Hypertension Diagnosis and Management.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2025Review
- Development of risk models of incident hypertension using machine learning on the HUNT study data.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Survey and Evaluation of Hypertension Machine Learning Research.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
- Development and validation of prediction models for hypertension risks: A cross-sectional study based on 4,287,407 participants.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluating the risk of hypertension in residents in primary care in Shanghai, China with machine learning algorithms.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Development of a risk prediction model for incident hypertension in Japanese individuals: the Hisayama Study.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2021Article
- A risk scoring system to predict the risk of new-onset hypertension among patients with type 2 diabetes.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2021Article
- Development of the prediction model for hypertension in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVarious hypertension predictive models have been developed worldwide; however, there is no existing predictive model for hypertension among Chinese rural populations.
methodsThis is a 6-year population-based prospective cohort in rural areas of China. Data was collected in 2007-2008 (baseline survey) and 2013-2014 (follow-up survey) from 8319 participants ranging in age from 35 to 74 years old. Specified gender hypertension predictive models were established based on multivariate Cox regression, Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Naive Bayes Classifier (NBC), and Classification and Regression Tree (CART) in the training set. External validation was conducted in the testing set. The estimated models were assessed by discrimination and calibration, respectively.
resultsDuring the follow-up period, 432 men and 604 women developed hypertension in the training set. Assessment for established models in men suggested men office-based model (M1) was better than others. C-index of M1 model in the testing set was 0.771 (95% confidence Interval (CI) = 0.750, 0.791), and calibration χ
conclusionsNot all machine-learning models performed better than the traditional Cox regression models. The W1 and ANN models for women and M1 model for men have better predictive performance which could potentially be recommended for predicting hypertension risk among rural populations.
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.