Observational studyBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2020
First line drug treatment for hypertension and reductions in blood pressure according to age and ethnicity: cohort study in UK primary care.
Observational study in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Perpetual Cycle of Racial Bias in Healthcare and Healthcare Education: A Systematic Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Pooled it
- Use of sensitivity analyses to assess uncontrolled confounding from unmeasured variables in observational, active comparator pharmacoepidemiologic studies: a systematic review.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Pooled it
- Are Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors Effective in the Treatment of Hypertension in Black Patients?CJC open · 2026Review
- Hypertension in Sub-Saharan Africa: Burden, Barriers and Priorities for Improving Treatment Outcomes.Circulation research · 2025Review
- Article
- Usefulness and caveats of real-world data for research on hypertension and its association with cardiovascular or renal disease in Japan.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024Review
- Article
- Characterizing the impacts of public health control measures on domestic violence services: qualitative interviews with domestic violence coalition leaders.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Microneedles and Their Application in Transdermal Delivery of Antihypertensive Drugs-A Review.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Genetic heterogeneity in cardiovascular disease across ancestries: Insights for mechanisms and therapeutic intervention.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2023Review
- Overcoming Confounding to Characterize the Effects of Calcium Channel Blockers.Function (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- Small molecule angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors: A medicinal chemistry perspective.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
- Antihypertensive Medication Use and Its Effects on Blood Pressure and Haemodynamics in a Tri-ethnic Population Cohort: Southall and Brent Revisited (SABRE).Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo study whether treatment recommendations based on age and ethnicity according to United Kingdom (UK) clinical guidelines for hypertension translate to blood pressure reductions in current routine clinical care.
designObservational cohort study.
settingUK primary care, from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2017.
participantsNew users of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB), calcium channel blockers (CCB), and thiazides.
main outcome measuresChange in systolic blood pressure in new users of ACEI/ARB versus CCB, stratified by age (<
resultsDuring one year of follow-up, 87 440 new users of ACEI/ARB, 67 274 new users of CCB, and 22 040 new users of thiazides were included (median 4 (interquartile range 2-6) blood pressure measurements per user). For non-black people who did not have diabetes and who were younger than 55, CCB use was associated with a larger reduction in systolic blood pressure of 1.69 mm Hg (99% confidence interval -2.52 to -0.86) relative to ACEI/ARB use at 12 weeks, and a reduction of 0.40 mm Hg (-0.98 to 0.18) in those aged 55 and older. In subgroup analyses using six finer age categories of non-black people who did not have diabetes, CCB use versus ACEI/ARB use was associated with a larger reduction in systolic blood pressure only in people aged 75 and older. Among people who did not have diabetes, systolic blood pressure decreased more with CCB use than with ACEI/ARB use in black people (reduction difference 2.15 mm Hg (-6.17 to 1.87)); the corresponding reduction difference was 0.98 mm Hg (-1.49 to -0.47) in non-black people.
conclusionsSimilar reductions in blood pressure were found to be associated with new use of CCB as with new use of ACEI/ARB in non-black people who did not have diabetes, both in those who were aged younger than 55 and those aged 55 and older. For black people without diabetes, CCB new use was associated with numerically greater reductions in blood pressure than ACEI/ARB compared with non-black people without diabetes, but the confidence intervals were overlapping for the two groups. These results suggest that the current UK algorithmic approach to first line antihypertensive treatment might not lead to greater reductions in blood pressure. Specific indications could be considered in treatment recommendations.
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.