ArticleJournal of hypertension2019
Sex differences in masked hypertension: the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults study.
Article in Journal of hypertension, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blood pressure and vascular function response to maximal graded exercise tests in young men with masked hypertension.American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology · 2025Article
- Hypertension Management in Women With a Multidisciplinary Approach.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2025Review
- Sex and gender differences in cognitive resilience to aging and Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Review
- Psychological resources and incident hypertension in the coronary artery risk development in young adults (CARDIA) study.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2023Article
- Lifestyle Behaviors Among Adults Recommended for Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring According to the 2017 ACC/AHA Blood Pressure Guideline.American journal of hypertension · 2021Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the association of sex with masked hypertension, defined by out-of-clinic hypertension based on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) among adults without hypertension based on blood pressure (BP) measured in the clinic, after adjusting for potential confounders.
methodsWe evaluated sex differences in the prevalence of masked hypertension and the difference between awake, or alternatively 24-h, ambulatory BP and clinic BP using multivariable adjusted models among 658 participants who underwent 24-h ABPM and had clinic SBP/DBP less than 140/90 mmHg during the Year 30 Exam of the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults study.
resultsThe mean age ± standard deviation (SD) of the participants was 54.8 ± 3.7 years, 58.4% were women, and 58.2% were black. The prevalence of any masked hypertension was 37.5% among women and 60.6% among men. In a model including adjustment for demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, antihypertensive medication, and clinic BP, the prevalence ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing men versus women were 1.39 (1.18-1.63) for any masked hypertension, and 1.60 (1.28-1.99), 1.71 (1.36-2.15), and 1.40 (1.13-1.73) for masked awake, 24-h and asleep hypertension, respectively. In a fully adjusted model, the differences between mean awake ambulatory BP and clinic BP were 2.75 [standard error (SE) 0.92] mmHg higher for SBP and 3.61 (SE 0.58) mmHg higher for DBP among men compared with women.
conclusionThe prevalence of masked hypertension on ABPM was high in both men and women. Male sex was an independent predictor of masked hypertension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.