ArticlePloS one2026
Genetic predisposition to high blood pressure and out-of-office hypertension: Insights from a population sample in liechtenstein.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic predisposition is a risk factor for office hypertension. We sought to determine whether genetic predisposition identifies individuals with ambulatory daytime hypertension. 1444 participants from the GAPP study (ages 25-41) were analyzed. We evaluated two measures of predisposition to hypertension: family history and polygenic risk scores (PRS). We evaluated correlation of predisposition with blood pressure traits and compared incremental value of each predisposition measure to a validated ambulatory BP prediction model. 12% of participants had office hypertension, while 37% had out-of-office hypertension. The correlation between PRS and family history of hypertension was low (R2 = 4.96x10-3), but both were strongly associated with ambulatory blood pressure (2.2 mmHg per 1 SD increase [95% CI: 1.6, 2.7] & 2.4 mmHg increase with positive family history [95% CI: 1.3, 3.4], respectively). PRS provides incremental improvement predicting ambulatory systolic blood pressure beyond a validated blood pressure prediction score (ΔAIC = -33), whereas family history does not (ΔAIC = 1). The difference between a baseline prediction algorithm for identifying ambulatory systolic hypertension (positive likelihood ratio of 6.87 [95% CI: 5.56, 8.49]; negative likelihood ratio of 0.45 [95% CI: 0.39, 0.51]) and the same model with PRS integrated (positive likelihood ratio of 7.69 [95% CI: 6.18, 9.57]; negative likelihood ratio of 0.43 [95% CI: 0.37, 0.49]) was modest. In a white European sample from Liechtenstein, PRS provides incremental information in identification of individuals with ambulatory hypertension, unlike family history. However, these gains are modest and warrant further development to improve predictive utility at the point-of-care.
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.