ArticleResearch square2026
Rural-Urban Differences in the Hypertension Cascade of Care in Northwestern Tanzania: A Community-Based Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Research square, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Hypertension is a leading modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality worldwide, yet substantial gaps persist in its detection and management in low- and middle-income countries. Understanding where attrition occurs along the hypertension care cascade is critical for identifying high-impact intervention points, particularly in settings undergoing rapid demographic and epidemiological transition. Methods: The original parent study informing this secondary analysis was a community-based cross-sectional analysis of adults aged 18 years and older in rural and urban districts of Northwestern Tanzania using data from a baseline non-communicable disease survey in 2019. Twelve districts across six regions were selected through a multistage cluster sampling approach. Hypertension care was assessed using a cascade-of-care framework comprising four sequential stages: prior blood pressure screening, prior diagnosis, access to antihypertensive medication, and blood pressure control at the time of screening. Analyses were stratified by rural-urban residence, with statistical comparisons accounting for clustering at the district level. Results: Among 6,957 participants, 26% reported ever having their blood pressure measured by a health professional, with no significant difference between rural and urban settings (28% vs. 24%, p = 0.09). Among those previously screened, 42% reported a prior diagnosis of hypertension, with a higher proportion among rural residents (45% vs. 39%, p = 0.001). Approximately half of diagnosed individuals reported access to antihypertensive medication, with no rural-urban differences. Among participants with medication access, 64% achieved blood pressure control, with comparable control rates across settings. Conclusion: The primary bottleneck in hypertension care in Northwestern Tanzania occurs at early detection, with uniformly low screening across rural and urban populations. Once identified and treated, effective blood pressure control is achievable. Strengthening early screening and care activation represents the greatest opportunity to improve hypertension outcomes and provides a critical pre-pandemic baseline to inform policy and programmatic interventions.
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.