ArticleBMJ open2022
Protocol for a systematic review assessing the measurement of dietary sodium intake among adults with elevated blood pressure.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring Salt Reduction Strategies: Navigating Policy Implementation in the Middle East.Food science & nutrition · 2026Review
- Impact of Socioeconomic Factors and Lifestyle on Salt and Potassium Intake and Sodium-to-Potassium Ratio: EH-UH 2 Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Nutrition literacy and salt reduction measures: a mediating role of salt reduction intention.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Energy and Core Nutrients of Condiments in China.Nutrients · 2023Article
- A Need for Improvement in the Definition of Resistant Arterial Hypertension.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Research on risk factors of ischemic cerebrovascular disease in postmenopausal women based on the social-ecological model.European journal of medical research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAccurate sodium intake estimates in adults with elevated blood pressure are essential for monitoring salt reduction progress and preventing cardiovascular diseases. However, sodium assessments are challenging in this high-risk population because many commonly used antihypertensive drugs alter urinary sodium excretion. Despite the high cost and substantial participant burden of gold-standard 24-hour urine collection, the relative performance of existing spot-urine based equations and dietary self-report instruments have not been well studied in this population, who will benefit from salt restriction. This systematic review aims to describe the current methods of assessing dietary sodium intake in adults with elevated blood pressure and determine what method can provide a valid and accurate estimate of sodium intake compared with the gold standard 24-hour urine collection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Studies assessing sodium intake in adults aged 18 years and above with reported elevated blood pressure will be included. Five electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, WoS and Cochrane CENTRAL) will be systematically searched from inception to March 2021. Also, a manual search of bibliographies and grey literature will be conducted. Two reviewers will screen the records independently for eligibility. One reviewer will extract all data, and two others will review the extracted data for accuracy. The methodological quality of included studies will be evaluated based on three scoring systems: (1) National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute for interventional studies; (2) Biomarker-based Cross-sectional Studies for biomarker-based observational studies and (3) European Micronutrient Recommendation Aligned Network of Excellence for validation studies of dietary self-report instruments. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As the proposed systematic review will collect and analyse secondary data associated with individuals, there will be no ethical approval requirement. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal or presented at a conference. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020176137.
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.