Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33908074›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2021

Antihypertensive medications and COVID-19 diagnosis and mortality: Population-based case-control analysis in the United Kingdom.

Emma Rezel-Potts, Abdel Douiri, Phil J Chowienczyk, Martin C Gulliford

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Hypertension and COVID-19: Ongoing Controversies.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emma Rezel-PottsKing's College London, School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2986-792X
Abdel DouiriKing's College London, School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, London, UK.
Phil J ChowienczykKing's College London, British Heart Foundation Centre, London, UK.
Martin C GullifordKing's College London, School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, London, UK.
King's College London · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation SP/14/8/31352Medical Research Council MR/M016560/1NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAntihypertensive drugs have been implicated in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility and severity, but estimated associations may be susceptible to bias. We aimed to evaluate antihypertensive medications and COVID-19 diagnosis and mortality, accounting for healthcare-seeking behaviour.

methodsA population-based case-control study was conducted including 16 866 COVID-19 cases and 70 137 matched controls from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We evaluated all-cause mortality among COVID-19 cases. Exposures were angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-blockers (B), calcium-channel blockers (C), thiazide diuretics (D) and other antihypertensive drugs (O). Analyses were adjusted for covariates and consultation frequency.

resultsACEIs were associated with lower odds of COVID-19 diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.88) as were ARBs (AOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95) with little attenuation from adjustment for consultation frequency. C and D were also associated with lower odds of COVID-19 diagnosis. Increased odds of COVID-19 for B (AOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.12-1.26) were attenuated after adjustment for consultation frequency (AOR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95-1.08). Patients treated with ACEIs or ARBs had similar odds of mortality (AOR 1.00, 95% CI 0.83-1.20) to patients treated with classes B, C, D or O or patients receiving no antihypertensive therapy (AOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83-1.18).

conclusionsThere was no evidence that antihypertensive therapy is associated with increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis or mortality; most classes of antihypertensive therapy showed negative associations with COVID-19 diagnosis.

Indexed as

COVID-19HypertensionAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive AgentsCase-Control StudiesCOVID-19 TestingHumansSARS-CoV-2Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive Agentsangiotensin converting enzyme inhibitorsangiotensin receptor blockersantihypertensive treatmentclinical practice research datalinkCOVID-19renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitorsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33908074
PMCPMC8239680
OpenAlexW3158535717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.