ArticleBMJ global health2025
Does home-based screening improve hypertension diagnosis, treatment and control? A regression discontinuity analysis in urban India.
Article in BMJ global health, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As part of India's efforts to expand primary healthcare services, several state governments are implementing or considering home-based hypertension screening programmes to improve population-wide diagnosis and blood pressure (BP) control rates. However, there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of home-based screening programmes in India. Using six waves of population-representative cohort data (N=15574), we estimate the causal effect of a home-based hypertension screening intervention on diagnosis, treatment, and BP using a novel application of the Regression Discontinuity Design. We find that measuring individuals' BP in their homes and providing health information and a referral to those with elevated BP did not meaningfully improve hypertension diagnosis (0.12 percentage points (pp), 95% CI -1.39 to 1.75), treatment (-0.16 pp, 95% CI -2.18 to 1.03), or change in BP (systolic: -0.96mm Hg, 95% CI -5.63 to 1.14; diastolic: 0.21, 95% CI -1.65 to 1.65). Our heterogeneity analyses suggest that home-based screening may reduce systolic BP for women with secondary education and women living in Chennai. However, we find null effects for diagnosis and treatment among these subpopulations and in all outcome variables across the other subpopulations and alternative specifications. Our findings suggest that a lack of knowledge of one's hypertension status might not be the primary reason for low diagnosis and treatment rates in India, where other structural and behavioural barriers may be more relevant. Adapting screening efforts to address these additional barriers will be essential for India's efforts to achieve universal health coverage.
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.