Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35706499›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2022

Variability independent of mean blood pressure as a real-world measure of cardiovascular risk.

Joseph E Ebinger, Matthew Driver, David Ouyang, Patrick Botting, Hongwei Ji, Mohamad A Rashid, Ciantel A Blyler, Natalie A Bello, Florian Rader, Teemu J Niiranen and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Blood pressure variability: a review.Journal of hypertension · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Joseph E EbingerDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Matthew DriverDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
David OuyangDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Patrick BottingDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Hongwei JiDepartment of Cardiology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China.
Mohamad A RashidDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Ciantel A BlylerDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Natalie A BelloDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Florian RaderDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Teemu J NiiranenUniversity of Turku, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Christine M AlbertDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Susan ChengDepartment of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

Yerkes National Primate Research Center Role of type-I IFN in regulating COVID-19 induced inflammation and pathogenesisP51OD011132 · OD · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Joon Sup Lee · 2012 to 2026
$167.0M
Barber-Pharmacist Coordination to Improve Blood Pressure Management in Black MenR01HL117983 · NHLBI · CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER · PI ALBERT, CHRISTINE M · 2014 to 2018
$8.6M
Cardiac Manifestations of PreeclampsiaR01HL153382 · NHLBI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI BELLO, NATALIE A · 2020 to 2023
$1.6M
Blood Pressure Measurement and Hypertension in PregnancyK23HL136853 · NHLBI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI BELLO, NATALIE A · 2018 to 2022
$948k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL136853NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL117983NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL153382NIH HHS P51 OD011132
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Individual-level blood pressure (BP) variability, independent of mean BP levels, has been associated with increased risk for cardiovascular events in cohort studies and clinical trials using standardized BP measurements. The extent to which BP variability relates to cardiovascular risk in the real-world clinical practice setting is unclear. We sought to determine if BP variability in clinical practice is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes using clinically generated data from the electronic health record (EHR). Methods: We identified 42,482 patients followed continuously at a single academic medical center in Southern California between 2013 and 2019 and calculated their systolic and diastolic BP variability independent of the mean (VIM) over the first 3 years of the study period. We then performed multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to examine the association between VIM and both composite and individual outcomes of interest (incident myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and death). Findings: Both systolic (HR, 95% CI 1.22, 1.17-1.28) and diastolic VIM (1.24, 1.19-1.30) were positively associated with the composite outcome, as well as all individual outcome measures. These findings were robust to stratification by age, sex and clinical comorbidities. In sensitivity analyses using a time-shifted follow-up period, VIM remained significantly associated with the composite outcome for both systolic (1.15, 1.11-1.20) and diastolic (1.18, 1.13-1.22) values. Interpretation: VIM derived from clinically generated data remains associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes and represents a risk marker beyond mean BP, including in important demographic and clinical subgroups. The demonstrated prognostic ability of VIM derived from non-standardized BP readings indicates the utility of this measure for risk stratification in a real-world practice setting, although residual confounding from unmeasured variables cannot be excluded. Funding: This study was funded in part by National Institutes of Health grants R01-HL134168, R01-HL131532, R01-HL143227, R01-HL142983, U54-AG065141; R01-HL153382, K23-HL136853, K23-HL153888, and K99-HL157421; China Scholarship Council grant 201806260086; Academy of Finland (Grant no: 321351); Emil Aaltonen Foundation; Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research.

Indexed as

BP variabilityElectronic health recordHypertensionPreventive cardiologyRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID35706499
PMCPMC9112125

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.