Evidence mapPaperPMID 42375334Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026

Intensive blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Zeguang Liu, Junfeng Wang, Chenguang Niu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zeguang Liu *Department of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University, Kaifeng, China.
Junfeng Wang *Department of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University, Kaifeng, China.
Chenguang NiuDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University, Kaifeng, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Although guidelines recommend lower blood pressure targets for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remains inconsistent regarding the balance between reducing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the risk of adverse events. Methods: This meta-analysis included RCTs comparing intensive versus conventional blood pressure control in patients with T2D. The primary outcome was MACE, and secondary outcomes included adverse events. Data were synthesized using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the influence of different blood pressure targets and concomitant intensive glucose or lipid management. Results: Nine trials comprising 34,260 participants with T2D were included. Intensive blood pressure control was associated with a significantly lower risk of MACE compared with conventional control [7.9% vs 9.7%; risk ratio (RR), 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.89; Conclusions: Intensive blood pressure control significantly reduces the risk of MACE in patients with T2D. Strategies incorporating explicit DBP targets may offer substantial benefits. However, it should be paid attention to monitoring and preventing adverse events. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251266814.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HypertensionBlood PressureHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntihypertensive Agentshypertensionintensive blood pressure controlmajor adverse cardiovascular eventsmeta-analysistype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID42375334
PMCPMC13310730

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.