Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35363792›Full record

Observational studyPLoS medicine2022

Simplified hypertension screening methods across 60 countries: An observational study.

Rodrigo M Carrillo-Larco, Wilmer Cristobal Guzman-Vilca, Dinesh Neupane

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PLoS medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Rodrigo M Carrillo-LarcoDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2090-1856
Wilmer Cristobal Guzman-VilcaCRONICAS Centre of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0002-2194-8496
Dinesh NeupaneDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1501-2990
Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia · PEJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Wellcome Trust 214185/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSimplified blood pressure (BP) screening approaches have been proposed. However, evidence is limited to a few countries and has not documented the cardiovascular risk amongst missed hypertension cases, limiting the uptake of these simplified approaches. We quantified the proportion of missed, over-diagnosed, and consistently identified hypertension cases and the 10-year cardiovascular risk in these groups. METHODS AND

findingsWe used 60 WHO STEPS surveys (cross-sectional and nationally representative; n = 145,174) conducted in 60 countries in 6 world regions between 2004 and 2019. Nine simplified approaches were compared against the standard (average of the last 2 of 3 BP measurements). The 10-year cardiovascular risk was computed with the 2019 World Health Organization Cardiovascular Risk Charts. We used t tests to compare the cardiovascular risk between the missed and over-diagnosed cases and the consistent hypertension cases. We used Poisson multilevel regressions to identify risk factors for missed cases (adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, and 10-year cardiovascular risk). Across all countries, compared to the standard approach, the simplified approach that missed the fewest cases was using the second BP reading if the first BP reading was 130-145/80-95 mm Hg (5.62%); using only the second BP reading missed 5.82%. The simplified approach with the smallest over-diagnosis proportion was using the second BP reading if the first BP measurement was ≥140/90 mm Hg (3.03%). In many countries, cardiovascular risk was not significantly different between the missed and consistent hypertension groups, yet the mean was slightly lower amongst missed cases. Cardiovascular risk was positively associated with missed hypertension depending on the simplified approach. The main limitation of the work is the cross-sectional design.

conclusionsSimplified BP screening approaches seem to have low misdiagnosis rates, and cardiovascular risk could be lower amongst missed cases than amongst consistent hypertension cases. Simplified BP screening approaches could be included in large screening programmes and busy clinics.

Indexed as

HypertensionBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMass ScreeningRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID35363792
PMCPMC9012386
OpenAlexW4220871694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.