ReviewCureus2025
White Coat Hypertension in Primary Care: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
White coat hypertension (WCH) is the presence of elevated blood pressure (BP) in clinical settings, despite normal readings outside of the office, measured through ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) or home BP monitoring (HBPM), in untreated individuals. WCH is associated with increased risk of sustained hypertension (SH), target organ damage (TOD), metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular (CV) events. The prevalence of WCH is not consistent across studies due to different BP cut-offs used and varies depending on the definition of WCH and the cohort studied. There is no universally defined approach to its definition, with variability among the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA), European Society of Hypertension (ESH), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. There is insufficient evidence from randomized controlled trials on whether WCH requires treatment. Current guidelines suggest lifestyle interventions and monitoring for patients with no additional CV risk factors, and lifestyle interventions along with drug treatment for those patients with increased CV risk or with hypertension-mediated organ damage. Annual ABPM or HBPM is advised to track progression to SH. Studies have shown that WCH may not be benign, with some evidence linking it to an increased risk of CV events and total mortality. Several barriers hinder effective diagnosis in primary care, including cost, limited access to ABPM, provider knowledge gaps, and patient non-compliance with HBPM protocols. Improvement strategies include health provider training, patient education, enhanced physician-patient communication, and potential use of telemedicine for remote BP monitoring. Strengthening the patient-physician relationship may also reduce anxiety-driven BP elevations during clinic visits. Addressing these barriers through policy changes and behavioral interventions can enhance the identification and management of WCH, prevent overtreatment, and reduce healthcare costs.
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.