Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34110518›Full record

ReviewCurrent hypertension reports2021

How We Got Where We Are in Blood Pressure Targets.

Johann Herberth, Karim M Soliman, Tibor Fülöp, Jan N Basile

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current hypertension reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Johann HerberthDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas St, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Karim M SolimanDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas St, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA. drkarimsoliman@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0960-2644
Tibor FülöpDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas St, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Jan N BasileMedicine Services, Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, SC, USA.
Medical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewWhile we started clinical trials evaluating the benefit of lowering systolic BP's >160 mm Hg and diastolic BPs of <130 mm Hg, the latest guideline suggests a target of <130/80 mm Hg in those with hypertension. This article summarizes exactly how we got to where we are looking over the last half-century. RECENT

findingsOur understanding of systolic and diastolic blood pressure targets to improve cardiovascular outcomes has changed substantially over the past 5 decades. Regarding diastolic blood pressure targets to improve cardiovascular outcomes, initially the VA1 in 1967 had set the goal to <115 mmHg. Over time, several studies including the VA2, Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT), and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group 38 (UKPDS38) highlighted even greater cardiovascular benefit with lower diastolic targets <80 mmHg, especially in diabetic patients. Of equal importance, multiple studies have focused the attention to systolic blood pressure targets. Starting in 1948 with the Framingham study, passing through the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP), Syst-Eur and Syst-China trials, all have set the systolic blood pressure goal <150 mmHg. Most recently, the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial showed an improved cardiovascular outcome with a systolic blood pressure target <140 mmHg in patients with type 2 diabetes, while the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) in non-diabetic patients moved it closer to 120 mmHg. There is "no one size fits all" when it comes to blood pressure targets to improve cardiovascular outcomes. To progress our understanding of individual blood pressure goals, future studies might develop a more standardized approach to highlight characteristics such as design and end point definitions while allowing clinical practitioners greater latitude to adapt guideline recommendations to individual patient characteristics and clinical needs.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2HypertensionAgedAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureChinaHumansProspective StudiesAntihypertensive AgentsBlood pressure targetsCardiovascular diseaseClinical trialsDiastolic blood pressureGuidelinesHypertensionSystolic blood pressure

Identifiers

PMID34110518
OpenAlexW3169609786

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.