Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36216934›Full record

ArticleNature medicine2022

Effects of elevated systolic blood pressure on ischemic heart disease: a Burden of Proof study.

Christian Razo, Catherine A Welgan, Catherine O Johnson, Susan A McLaughlin, Vincent Iannucci, Anthony Rodgers, Nelson Wang, Kate E LeGrand, Reed J D Sorensen, Jiawei He and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Iontronic tip-sensing guidewires.Nature biomedical engineering · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Christian RazoInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. razoc@uw.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0098-9563
Catherine A WelganJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4310-1632
Catherine O JohnsonInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Susan A McLaughlinInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Vincent IannucciInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Anthony RodgersThe George Institute for Global Health, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Nelson WangThe George Institute for Global Health, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Kate E LeGrandInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2690-3198
Reed J D SorensenInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jiawei HeInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Peng ZhengInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Aleksandr Y AravkinInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Simon I HayInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0611-7272
Christopher J L MurrayInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4930-9450
Gregory A RothInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
University of Washington · USUNSW Sydney · AUJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a major risk factor for ischemic heart disease (IHD), the leading cause of death worldwide. Using data from published observational studies and controlled trials, we estimated the mean SBP-IHD dose-response function and burden of proof risk function (BPRF), and we calculated a risk outcome score (ROS) and corresponding star rating (one to five). We found a very strong, significant harmful effect of SBP on IHD, with a mean risk-relative to that at 100 mm Hg SBP-of 1.39 (95% uncertainty interval including between-study heterogeneity 1.34-1.44) at 120 mm Hg, 1.81 (1.70-1.93) at 130 mm Hg and 4.48 (3.81-5.26) at 165 mm Hg. The conservative BPRF measure indicated that SBP exposure between 107.5 and 165.0 mm Hg raised risk by 101.36% on average, yielding a ROS of 0.70 and star rating of five. Our analysis shows that IHD risk was already increasing at 120 mm Hg SBP, rising steadily up to 165 mm Hg and increasing less steeply above that point. Our study endorses the need to prioritize and strengthen strategies for screening, to raise awareness of the need for timely diagnosis and treatment of hypertension and to increase the resources allocated for understanding primordial prevention of elevated blood pressure.

Indexed as

HypertensionMyocardial IschemiaAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureHumansReactive Oxygen SpeciesAntihypertensive AgentsReactive Oxygen Species

Identifiers

PMID36216934
PMCPMC9556328
OpenAlexW4304080870

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.