ArticleJournal of hypertension2025
Independent and joint effect of central and brachial SBP on incident stroke in hypertensive adults.
Article in Journal of hypertension, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Arterial Stiffness, Central Blood Pressure, and the Risk of Incident Stroke in Hypertensive Adults.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIt is unclear whether central SBP (cSBP) is an independent predictor of stroke above and beyond brachial SBP (bSBP). This study aimed to investigate the difference between cSBP and bSBP in predicting first stroke and the joint effect of cSBP and bSBP on the risk of first stroke in hypertensive adults.
methodsA total of 8122 hypertensive adults without stroke history were included in this study. cSBP was measured noninvasively using A-Pulse CASPro device. The outcome was first stroke. During a median follow-up of 4.4 years, 579 first strokes were identified.
resultsA total of 8122 hypertensive adults without stroke history were included in this study. cSBP was measured noninvasively using A-Pulse CASPro device. The outcome was first stroke. During a median follow-up of 4.4 years, 579 first strokes were identified. The risk of first stroke increased by the same 16% [hazard ratio: 1.16, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.07-1.26] for per SD increment in both cSBP and bSBP. The differences in areas under the curves, continuous net reclassification indices, and integrated discrimination indices of bSBP and cSBP models for predicting first stroke were 0.003 (95% CI: -0.003, 0.008), 0.007 (95% CI: -0.058, 0.071), and -0.0002 (95% CI: -0.0028, 0.0013), respectively. When cSBP and bSBP were evaluated jointly, participants in the highest tertiles of both cSBP and bSBP had the highest risk of first stroke compared with their counterparts (hazard ratio: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.29-1.96; P -interaction = 0.034). Similar results were found for ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke.
conclusionAlthough cSBP was not found to be superior to bSBP in predicting first stroke, cSBP and bSBP were jointly associated with the risk of first stroke among hypertensive adults.
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.