Trial reportBMJ open2025
Does mean systolic blood pressure less than 130 mm Hg ensure high rates of control to <140/<90 mm Hg? A cross-sectional analysis of two cohorts.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution in the targets for blood pressure treatment.Current opinion in nephrology and hypertension · 2026Review
- The Evolution of High Blood Pressure Guidelines in the United States: A 50-Year Arc.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine how strongly mean systolic blood pressure (mSBP, mm Hg) was related to hypertension control and if an mSBP<130 was required to achieve ≥80% control to <140/<90.
designmSBP and per cent control to <140/<90 at the last encounter were assessed in a cross-sectional analysis of two cohorts with hypertension: (1) randomised, controlled Systolic blood PRessure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) and (2) real-world American Medical Association's Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, Partner with patients Hypertension programme.
settingSPRINT randomised participants with hypertension to two SBP targets: <140 (standard treatment, SPRINT-S) and <120 (intensive treatment, SPRINT-I). MAP (Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, Partner with patients) included adults with hypertension at five healthcare systems incentivised by payers to control BP to <140/<90.
participantsSPRINT participants with year 2 data. Patients in MAP (had hypertension, were aged≥18 years, had ≥2 healthcare visits from November 2019 through October 2021 and received care from clinicians (n=544) with ≥24 patients. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: mSBP and control to <140/<90. In MAP, control to <140/<90 was assessed in clinicians grouped by 5 mm Hg increments in the mSBP of their patient panel.
resultsIn SPRINT-S (n=4303) and SPRINT-I (n=4323), mSBP values at the last visit were 136.7 and 121.7 with BP<140/<90 in 61% and 88% of participants, respectively. In MAP, mSBP at the last visit (n=168 978 patients) was 132.1 with BP<140/<90 in 70% of participants. Among clinicians with participant mSBP of 120 to <125, 88% of their patients were controlled to <140/<90, similar to SPRINT-I. Control fell to 79% of patients, with clinician-level mSBP of 125 to <130, 71%, with mSBP of 130 to <135 and 57%, with mSBP of 135 to <140 (similar to SPRINT-S); mSBP accounted for 80% of variance in clinician-level hypertension control. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: mSBP is strongly related to hypertension control. Moreover, mSBP<130 is required to attain control rates to <140/<90 in the range of 80% and higher.
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.