Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41259451›Full record

ArticleBrazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica2025

Difference in the prevalence of hypertension when measured according to the American Heart Association and the European Society of Cardiology hypertension cut-offs in the ELSA-Brasil cohort.

A L F Favaretto, B B Duncan, M I Schmidt, M S Bittencourt, S M Barreto, A B S Santos, M Foppa, L B Moreira

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

A L F FavarettoPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Cardiologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0201-605X
B B DuncanPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7491-2630
M I SchmidtPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3837-0731
M S BittencourtDepartment of Internal Medicine and Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine and Department of RadiologyUniversity of Pittsburgh School of MedicineUSAUSA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3711-1754
S M BarretoDepartamento de Medicina Preventiva e Social, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil.
A B S SantosDepartamento de Cardiologia, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Cardiologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2493-0547
M FoppaDepartamento de Cardiologia, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Cardiologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2914-4406
L B MoreiraPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Cardiologia, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4730-7988

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 2017 US guidelines for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults proposed the diagnosis of hypertension at 130/80 mmHg, while the European Society of Cardiology and 2020 Brazilian Guidelines of Hypertension maintain the 140/90 mmHg cut-off. We aimed to evaluate how the cut-off established by the American Heart Association guidelines would impact the prevalence of hypertension in the ELSA-Brasil cohort and compare the clinical characteristics among these subgroups. The participants were part of the ongoing ELSA-Brasil multicenter cohort, with baseline data collected between 2008 and 2010, consisting of 15,105 public servants of both sexes aged 35 to 74 years. Hypertension (≥140 or ≥90 mmHg or use of antihypertensive drugs in the last two weeks if below these values) prevalence was 36.2% (95%CI: 35.4-36.9, n=5,456) with the Brazilian cut-off and 51.4% (95%CI: 50.6-52.1, n=7,756) when considering the US cut-off (SBP≥130 or DBP≥80 mmHg). In general, those with high blood pressure (HBP) presented an intermediate-risk profile compared to the hypertension group. Lowering the hypertension cut-off caused an absolute increase of 15.2% in the prevalence of hypertension in the sample of public servants studied. HBP individuals showed intermediate-risk profile between normal blood pressure and hypertension and represented a large fraction of the population who may benefit from treatment.

Indexed as

HypertensionPractice Guidelines as TopicAdultAgedAmerican Heart AssociationBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationBrazilCardiologyCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceReference Values

Identifiers

PMID41259451
PMCPMC12622929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.