Evidence mapPaperPMID 33246327Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of hypertension2021

Digit Preference in Office Blood Pressure Measurements, United States 2015-2019.

Kathryn E Foti, Lawrence J Appel, Kunihiro Matsushita, Josef Coresh, G Caleb Alexander, Elizabeth Selvin

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of hypertension, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Terminal Digit Preference in Pulmonary Hypertension Endpoints.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kathryn E FotiDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6380-2735
Lawrence J AppelDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kunihiro MatsushitaDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Josef CoreshDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
G Caleb AlexanderDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Elizabeth SelvinDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

CARDIOVASCULAR EPIDEMIOLOGY INSTITUTIONAL TRAININGT32HL007024 · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · 1985 to 2025
$3.7M
NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL152440NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007024NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK089174
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBlood pressure (BP) measurement error may lead to under- or overtreatment of hypertension. One common source of error is terminal digit preference, most often a terminal digit of "0." The objective was to evaluate national trends in terminal digit preference in office BP measurements among adults with treated hypertension.

methodsData were from IQVIA's National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative, serial cross-sectional survey of office-based physicians. The analysis included office visits from 2015 to 2019 among adults aged ≥18 years receiving antihypertensive treatment. Annual trends were examined in the percent of systolic and diastolic BP measurements ending in zero by patient sex, age, and race/ethnicity, physician specialty, and first or subsequent hypertension treatment visit.

resultsFrom 2015 to 2019, there were ~60 million hypertension treatment visits annually (unweighted N: 5,585-9,085). There was a decrease in the percent of visits with systolic (41.7%-37.7%) or diastolic (42.7%-37.8%) BP recordings ending in zero. Trends were similar by patient characteristics. However, a greater proportion of measurements ended in zero among patients aged ≥80 (vs. 15-59 or 60-79) years, first (vs. subsequent) treatment visits, visits to cardiologists (vs. primary care physicians), and visits with systolic BP ≥140 or diastolic BP ≥90 (vs. <140/90) mm Hg.

conclusionsDespite modest improvement, terminal digit preference remains a common problem in office BP measurement in the United States. Without bias, 10%-20% of measurements are expected to end in zero. Reducing digit preference is a priority for improving BP measurement accuracy and hypertension management.

Indexed as

Blood Pressure DeterminationHypertensionOffice VisitsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntihypertensive AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsUnited StatesYoung AdultAntihypertensive Agentsblood pressureblood pressure measurementhypertensionmeasurement errorterminal digit preference

Identifiers

PMID33246327
PMCPMC8628654
OpenAlexW3107255039

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.