ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2021
Simplified hypertension screening approaches with low misclassification and high efficiency in the United States, Nepal, and India.
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence-Based, Streamlined Approach to Measure Blood Pressure in Primary Care Settings.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2026Review
- Simplified hypertension screening methods across 60 countries: An observational study.PLoS medicine · 2022Observational
- Patterns of multimorbidity in India: A nationally representative cross-sectional study of individuals aged 15 to 49 years.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Need for HTA supported risk factor screening for hypertension and diabetes in Nepal: A systematic scoping review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Simplified hypertension screening approaches with low misclassification and high efficiency in the United States, Nepal, and India.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Standard triplicate blood pressure (BP) measurements pose time barriers to hypertension screening, especially in resource-limited settings. We assessed the implications of simplified approaches using fewer measurements with adults (≥18 years old) not using anti-hypertensive medications from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2016 (n = 30 614), and two datasets from May Measurement Month 2017-2018 (n = 14 795 for Nepal and n = 6 771 for India). We evaluated the proportion of misclassification of hypertension when employing the following simplified approaches: using only 1st BP, only 2nd BP, 2nd if 1st BP in a given range (otherwise using 1st), and average of 1st and 2nd BP. Hypertension was defined as average of 2nd and 3rd systolic BP ≥140 and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg. Using only the 1st BP, the proportion of missed hypertension ranged from 8.2%-12.1% and overidentified hypertension from 4.3%-9.1%. Using only 2nd BP reduced the misclassification considerably (corresponding estimates, 4.9%-6.4% for missed hypertension and 2.0%-4.4% for overidentified hypertension) but needed 2nd BP in all participants. Using 2nd BP if 1st BP ≥130/80 demonstrated similar estimates of missed hypertension (3.8%-8.1%) and overidentified hypertension (2.0%-3.9%), but only required a 2nd BP in 33.8%-59.8% of participants. In conclusion, a simplified approach utilizing 1st BP supplemented by 2nd BP in some individuals has low misclassification rates and requires approximately half of the total number of measurements compared to the standard approach, and thus can facilitate screening in resource-constrained settings.
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.