Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28058813›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2017

Outcomes of a multi-community hypertension implementation study: the American Heart Association's Check. Change. Control. program.

Monique L Anderson, Rachel Peragallo Urrutia, Emily C O'Brien, Nancy M Allen LaPointe, Alexander J Christian, Lisa A Kaltenbach, Laura E Webb, Angel M Alexander, Paramita Saha Chaudhuri, Juliana Crawford and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
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

12 authors.

Monique L AndersonDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Rachel Peragallo UrrutiaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Emily C O'BrienDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Nancy M Allen LaPointeDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Alexander J ChristianDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Lisa A KaltenbachDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Laura E WebbDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Angel M AlexanderDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Paramita Saha ChaudhuriDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Juliana CrawfordAmerican Heart Association, Dallas, TX, USA.
Patrick WayteAmerican Heart Association, Dallas, TX, USA.
Eric D PetersonDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-site, intensive, community-based blood pressure (BP) intervention programs have led to BP improvements. The authors examined the American Heart Association's Check. Change. CONTROL: (CCC) program (4069 patients/18 cities) to determine whether BP interventions can effectively be scaled to multiple communities, using a simplified template and local customization. Effectiveness was evaluated at each site via site percent enrollment goals, participant engagement, and BP change from first to last measurement. High-enrolling sites frequently recruited at senior residential institutions and service organizations held hypertension management classes and utilized established and new community partners. High-engagement sites regularly held hypertension education classes and followed up with participants. Top-performing sites commonly distributed BP cuffs, checked BP at engagement activities, and trained volunteers. CCC demonstrated that simplified community-based hypertension intervention programs may lead to BP improvements, but there was high outcomes variability among programs. Several factors were associated with BP improvement that may guide future program development.

Indexed as

AdultAmerican Heart AssociationBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationCommunity NetworksCounselingFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedModels, OrganizationalOutcome Assessment, Health CareProgram DevelopmentQuality ImprovementUnited Statesblood pressure managementhypertension intervention programs

Identifiers

PMID28058813
PMCPMC8030833

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.