Trial reportStroke2022
Effect of Intensive Blood Pressure Control on Incident Stroke Risk in Patients With Mild Cognitive Impairment.
Trial report in Stroke, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep medullary veins: a promising neuroimaging marker for mild cognitive impairment in outpatients.BMC neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with mild cognitive impairment may be at higher risk of incident stroke, but the effect of intensive blood pressure (BP) control on that risk has not been explored.
methodsWe performed a post hoc analysis of SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) and included patients with a baseline Montreal Cognitive Assessment score of 19 to 25 and without a prior history of stroke. The primary outcome was incident stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic) during follow-up. We report the unadjusted cumulative risk of our primary outcome by SPRINT randomization arm (intensive versus standard BP control) and also fit Cox models to the primary outcome and adjusted for patient age at randomization, race/ethnicity, sex, baseline BP, atrial fibrillation, diabetes, and smoking.
resultsWe included 5091 patients (mean age 68.2, 44% female, 56.7% non-Hispanic White, and 50.2% randomized to intensive BP control), of which 95/5091 (1.9%) had an incident stroke during a mean of 3.8±0.9 years of follow-up. The risk of incident stroke in patients randomized to standard BP control was 57/2536 (2.3%) and to intensive BP control was 38/2555 (1.5%;
conclusionsAlthough the SPRINT trial failed to show a reduction in stroke with intensive BP control for all subjects, those with a Montreal Cognitive Assessment score consistent with mild cognitive impairment at baseline had an association between intensive BP control and lower risk of incident stroke. Future trials of primary prevention of stroke may benefit from enrichment using baseline vascular biomarkers of elevated risk, such as mild cognitive impairment.
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.