ArticleJAMA network open2025
SPRINT Treatment Among Adults With Chronic Kidney Disease From 2 Large Health Care Systems.
Article in JAMA network open, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: It is unclear whether the effects of intensive vs standard blood pressure (BP) targets seen in clinical trials generalize to patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) encountered in everyday practice due to differences in the distribution of cardiovascular risk factors and coexisting conditions. Objective: To evaluate whether the beneficial and adverse effects of intensive vs standard BP control observed in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) are transportable to a target population of adults with CKD in clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study identified 2 populations with CKD who met the eligibility criteria for SPRINT between January 1 and December 31, 2019, in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Kaiser Permanente of Southern California (KPSC). Baseline covariate, treatment, and outcome data from SPRINT were combined with covariate data from these populations to estimate the treatment effects in the target population, applying models that estimated outcomes using distributions in the trial. Analysis was performed between May 2023 and October 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were major cardiovascular events, all-cause death, cognitive impairment, CKD progression, and adverse events at 4 years. Results: A total of 85 938 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.7 [10.0] years; 81 628 [95.0%] male) from the VHA and 13 983 patients (mean [SD] age, 77.4 [9.6] years; 5371 [38.4%] male) from KPSC were included. Compared with 9361 SPRINT participants (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [9.4] years; 6029 [64.4%] male), these patients were older, had less prevalent cardiovascular disease, higher albuminuria, and used more statins. The associations of intensive vs standard BP control with major cardiovascular events, all-cause death, and adverse events were transportable from the trial to the VHA and KPSC populations; however, the trial's effects on cognitive and CKD outcomes were not transportable in 1 or both clinical populations. Intensive vs standard BP treatment was associated with lower absolute risks for major cardiovascular events at 4 years by 5.1% (95% CI, -9.8% to 3.2%) in the VHA population and 3.0% (95% CI, -6.3% to 0.3%) in the KPSC population and higher risks for adverse events by 1.3% (95% CI, -5.5% to 7.7%) in the VHA population and 3.1% (95% CI, -1.5% to 8.3%) in the KPSC population. Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study, the reduction in fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular end points and the increase in adverse events observed in SPRINT were largely transportable to trial-eligible CKD populations from clinical practice, suggesting benefits of implementing intensive BP targets.
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.