SynthesisJournal of human hypertension2021
Options for the diagnosis of high blood pressure in primary care: a systematic review and economic model.
Synthesis in Journal of human hypertension, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- An evaluation of the efficacy and the safety of home blood pressure monitoring in the control of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in both pre and postpartum periods: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Pooled it
- Experiences of treatment-resistant mental health conditions in primary care: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.BMC primary care · 2022Pooled it
- Automated Text Message-Based Program to Improve Uncontrolled Blood Pressure in Primary Care Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Reassessing home blood pressure thresholds: clinical implications of lowering the diagnostic criteria to 130/80 mmHg.Journal of hypertension · 2026Article
- Hypertension prevalence, detection, treatment and control among 1.4 million adults in England: a cross-sectional analysis from the Our Future Health study in 2022-2025.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Implementation of home blood pressure monitoring in preoperative anaesthesia assessment clinic.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Self-monitoring blood pressure in pregnancy: evaluation of women's experiences of the BUMP trials.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Detection and Control of Pregnancy Hypertension Using Self-Monitoring of Blood Pressure With Automated Telemonitoring: Cost Analyses of the BUMP Randomized Trials.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2024Article
- Using self-monitoring to detect and manage raised blood pressure and pre-eclampsia during pregnancy: the BUMP research programme and its impact.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024Review
- Comparability of a Blood-Pressure-Monitoring Smartphone Application with Conventional Measurements-A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension.Journal of hypertension · 2021Article
- Impact of changes to national guidelines on hypertension-related workload: an interrupted time series analysis in English primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 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.
Funding
Abstract
The 2011 NICE hypertension guideline (CG127) undertook a systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of different blood pressure (BP) assessment methods to confirm the diagnosis of hypertension. The guideline also undertook a cost-utility analysis exploring the cost-effectiveness of the monitoring methods. A new systematic review was undertaken as part of the 2019 NICE hypertension guideline update (NG136). BP monitoring methods compared included Ambulatory BP, Clinic BP and Home BP. Ambulatory BP was the reference standard. The economic model from the 2011 guideline was updated with this new accuracy data. Home BP was more sensitive and specific than Clinic BP. Specificity improved more than sensitivity since the 2011 review. A higher specificity translates into fewer people requiring unnecessary treatment. A key interest was to compare Home BP and Ambulatory BP, and whether any improvement in Home BP accuracy would change the model results. Ambulatory BP remained the most cost-effective option in all age and sex subgroups. In all subgroups, Ambulatory BP was associated with lower costs than Clinic BP and Home BP. In all except one subgroup (females aged 40), Ambulatory BP was dominant. However, Ambulatory BP remained the most cost-effective option in 40-year-old females as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for Home BP versus Ambulatory BP was above the NICE £20,000 threshold. The new systematic review showed that the accuracy of both Clinic BP and Home BP has increased. However, Ambulatory BP remains the most cost-effective option to confirm a diagnosis of hypertension in all subgroups evaluated.
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.