ReviewCureus2023
Optimizing Antihypertensive Management for Hypertensive Patients With Secondary Complications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Primary Care Settings.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite significant pharmacological advancements, hypertension management remains challenging, with varying quality of primary care. Digital tools and other non-pharmacological interventions hold promise in addressing this challenge. Consequently, a thorough examination of these interventions is recommended. This meta-analysis focuses on clinician-oriented strategies aimed at improving hypertension management, to assess the most effective approaches for improving antihypertensive prescribing and blood pressure control for secondary prevention. This was done through a systematic review of randomized controlled trials published in PubMed and Embase since the beginning of 2010 that aimed to enhance antihypertensive medication prescription in primary care settings for hypertensive patients with secondary complications while reporting changes in blood pressure or target achievement. We screened 6305 records. Four studies met the inclusion criteria, with reported interventions including physician education and the implementation of electronic decision support systems. All studies showed that the control group had a statistically significant lower systolic blood pressure, but the effect on diastolic blood pressure was not statistically significant. The overall mean difference was 2.12 mmHg (95% CI = 0.98; 3.26, P-value = 0.0003) for systolic blood pressure in favor of the control group and 1.22 mmHg (95% CI = -0.48; 3.26, P-value = 0.16) for diastolic blood pressure, which was not statistically significant. Despite considerable efforts to control hypertension, it remains a significant obstacle to optimal cardiovascular risk reduction. This review is also limited by a scarcity of studies.
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.