ArticleJournal of human hypertension2024
Differences in ambulatory versus home blood pressure levels by ethnicity: data from the United Kingdom and Japan.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2024. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study tested the hypothesis that differences in ethnicity impact the level of agreement between ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) and home BP (HBP) levels. A retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data from the UK and Japan was performed. Participants underwent office BP, daytime ABP, and HBP measurements. The ABP-HBP difference was compared between ethnic groups by multiple linear regression analysis. Diagnostic disagreement was defined as a disparity between the hypertension diagnoses obtained using ABP and HBP, since both measures share common thresholds of 135/85 mmHg for hypertension. Definite diagnostic disagreement was assigned where such a difference exceeded ±5 mmHg for either systolic BP (SBP) or diastolic BP (DBP). A total of 1 408 participants (age 62.1 ± 11.1 years, 48.6% males, 78.9% known hypertensive, White British 18.9%, South Asian 11.2%, African Caribbean 12.0%, Japanese 58.0%) were eligible. More Japanese participants showed higher ABP than HBP compared to White British: SBP + 3.09 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI) + 1.14, +5.04 mmHg; DBP + 5.67 mmHg, 95%CI + 4.51, +6.84 mmHg. More Japanese participants than African Caribbean participants exhibited diagnostic disagreement in SBP (33.2% vs. 20.7%, p = 0.006). Furthermore, Japanese participants had a higher percentage of definite diagnostic disagreement in SBP compared to White British (9.3% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.040) and African Caribbean participants (9.3% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.018). In conclusion, Japanese participants showed greater disparity between ABP and HBP compared to White British participants. Complementary use of ABP and HBP monitoring may be more beneficial for assessing cardiovascular disease risk in Japanese participants compared to other ethnic groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39343931What 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.