ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2025
Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Use of Angiotensin II Receptor Type 2/4 Stimulatory Vs. Inhibitory Antihypertensive Among Hypertensive Adults in the USA.
Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Associations of urinary isoprostanes with structural and load-dependent arterial stiffness: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2026Article
- Angiotensin II-stimulating versus inhibiting antihypertensives and risk of dementia: a nested case-control study using Australian general practice data.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Factors associated with angiotensin II stimulating vs. inhibiting antihypertensive drug use in older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
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
Abstract
objectivesStudies showed angiotensin II type 2 receptor/angiotensin II type 4 receptor (AT2R/AT4R) stimulatory antihypertensive was associated with a lower risk of dementia and cognitive impairment compared to the inhibitory one. This study aimed to identify the racial and ethnic differences in using these agents among the USA adults with hypertension.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS, 2016-2019). Individuals with a diagnosis of hypertension or self-reported hypertension and without dementia or Alzheimer's disease diagnosis were included in the analysis. We applied two multivariable logistic regressions to compare racial/ethnic differences in AT2R/AT4R stimulatory antihypertensive use and AT2R/AT4R inhibitory antihypertensive use, adjusting for covariates.
resultsTwenty-four thousand five hundred eighty-one individuals with hypertension and without dementia or Alzheimer's disease were identified. Among non-Hispanic Whites, 72.39% were using AT2R/AT4R inhibitory antihypertensive agents, vs. 66.97% using AT2R/AT4R stimulatory antihypertensive agents. In contrast, both non-Hispanic Black and Asian Americans were using more AT2R/AT4R stimulatory agents than inhibitory ones (16.40% vs. 12.16% and 4.79% vs. 3.43%, respectively). Compared to non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black (OR 1.980, 95% CI 1.839-2.132) and non-Hispanic Asian Americans (OR 1.545, 95% CI 1.356-1.761) were significantly associated with higher odds of prescribing AT2R/AT4R stimulatory agents, while Hispanics (OR 0.744, 95% CI 0.685-0.808) were associated with lower odds of prescribing AT2R/AT4R inhibitory agents compared to non-Hispanic Whites.
conclusionsThe results showed that the high-dementia risk populations like non-Hispanic Black and Asian American races are proportionally prescribed with higher use of low-dementia risk antihypertensive agents, compared to non-Hispanic Whites.
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.