ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2021
The Ecology of Antihypertensives in the United States, 1997-2017.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2021. 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.
- ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers differentially alter the response to angiotensin II treatment in vasodilatory shock.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Trial
- Health Care Spending After Initiating Sacubitril-Valsartan vs Renin-Angiotensin System Blockers for Heart Failure Treatment.JAMA health forum · 2025Article
- Higher circulating ACE2 and DPP3 but reduced ACE and angiotensinogen in hyperreninemic sepsis patients.Clinical science (London, England : 1979) · 2025Article
- Use and Cost Patterns of Antihypertensive Medications in the United States From 1996 to 2021.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2024Article
- Trends in antihypertensive drug utilization in British Columbia, 2004-2019: a descriptive study.CMAJ openArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAntihypertensives are the most used medication type in the USA, yet there remains uncertainty about the use of different antihypertensives. We sought to characterize use of antihypertensives by and within medication class(es) between 1997 and 2017. PATIENTS AND
methodsA repeated cross-sectional study of 493,596 adult individuals using the 1997-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). The Orange Book was used for adjunctive information. The primary outcome was the estimated use by and within antihypertensive medication class(es).
resultsThe proportion of individuals taking any antihypertensive during a year increased from 1997 to the early 2010s and then remained stable. The proportion of adults using angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) increased during the study period, while angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) increased until 2010 after which rates remained stable. Beta-blocker use was similar to that of ACE-Is with an earlier decline starting in 2012. Thiazide diuretic use increased from 1997 to 2007, leveled off until 2014, and declined from 2015 to 2017. Non-dihydropyridine CCB use declined throughout the study. ACE-Is, ARBs, CCBs, thiazide diuretics, and loop diuretics all had one dominant in-class medication. There was a clear increase in the use of losartan within ARBs, lisinopril within ACE-Is, and amlodipine within CCBs following generic conversion. Furosemide and hydrochlorothiazide started with and maintained a dominant position in their classes. Metoprolol use increased throughout the study and became the dominant beta-blocker.
conclusionsAntihypertensive classes appear to have a propensity to equilibrate to an individual medication, despite a lack of outcomes-based research to compare medications within a class.
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.