ReviewClinical hypertension2020
Intensive blood pressure lowering: a practical review.
Review in Clinical hypertension, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The 14-year cumulative genetic high blood pressure and risk of type 2 diabetes in Korean: observational and Mendelian randomization evidence.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Observational
- Diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in dialysis patients: a systematic review.Clinical hypertension · 2023Review
- Therapeutic roles of thiazides and loop diuretics in blood pressure control and renal protection against chronic kidney disease.Clinical hypertension · 2023Review
- Medical Telemonitoring for the Management of Hypertension in Older Patients in Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with very severe acute hypertension visiting the emergency department.Clinical hypertension · 2022Article
- Role of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in elderly hypertensive patients.Clinical hypertension · 2022Review
- Article
- Gender-specific differences in central blood pressure and optimal target blood pressure based on the prediction of cardiovascular events.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to the last Hypertension guideline recommendations, it may be concluded that intensive BP lowering is only advisable in a subgroup of patients where there is a clear net benefit of targeting to lower BP goals. However, taking into account the relevance of correct BP measurement, estimates of the benefits versus the harm should be based on reliable office BP measurements and home BP measurements.There is still debate about which BP goals are optimal in reducing morbidity and mortality in uncomplicated hypertensives and in those with associated comorbidities. In recent years, trials and meta-analyses have assessed intensive BP lowering, with some success. However, a careful examination of the results shows that current data are not easily applicable to the general hypertensive population.This article reviews the evidence on and controversies about intensive BP lowering in general and in specific clinical situations, and the importance of obtaining reliable BP readings in patients with hypertension and comorbidities.
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.