ArticleAmerican journal of hypertension2025
Prognostic Impact of Different Definitions of White-Coat Hypertension.
Article in American journal of hypertension, 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.
- Non-Dipping Blood Pressure in Pediatric Hypertension: A Narrative Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in arterial hypertension.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDifferent definitions of white-coat hypertension (WCH) may explain its variable outcome across studies.
methodsIn an Italian study started in 1986, we followed 3,153 people with (office blood pressure (BP) >=140/90 mmHg) and 457 without office hypertension for a mean of 10.4 years. None had previous cardiovascular disease. All underwent 24-h ambulatory BP (ABP) monitoring. We defined white-coat hypertension (WCH) as an average 24-h ABP < 130/80 mmHg or <125/75 mmHg. The primary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all-cause mortality.
resultsBaseline office BP was 156/97 mmHg in people with and 127/81 mmHg without hypertension. At follow-up, MACE events were 344 and 23, and all-cause deaths were 318 and 24 in people with and without hypertension, respectively. Compared to normotensive group, MACE risk was not higher in people with WCH and 24-h ABP < 125/75 mmHg (hazard ratio (HR), 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-2.10). Compared to normotensive group, MACE risk was higher in people with WCH and 24-h ABP < 130/80 mmHg (HR: 1.79; 95% CI, 1.07-2.29). All-cause death did not differ between the normotensive group and people with WCH and 24-h ABP < 125/75 mmHg (HR 1.37; 95% CI, 0.68-2.73), but it was higher than in the normotensive group when WCH was defined by a 24-h ABP < 130/80 mmHg (HR 1.82; 95% CI, 1.55-3.58).
conclusionsWCH defined by an average 24-h ABP < 125/75 mmHg identifies people at low risk of MACE and death in the long term. Even modestly above these threshold values, the risk associated with WCH increases.
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.