ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2026
Blood Pressure Phenotypes in Patients Recently Diagnosed With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Matched Controls: A Study in Urban Mozambique.
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate characterization of blood pressure (BP) phenotypes is essential for cardiovascular risk assessment, particularly among type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of different BP phenotypes using multiple BP assessment methods, in Black Africans, with and without T2DM. Recently diagnosed T2DM patients (n = 151) and age- and sex- matched controls (1:1) without T2DM had their BP assessed using standard office BP measurement (OBPM), unattended automated office BP measurement (u-AOBP), 24 h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), and home BP monitoring (HBPM). Four BP phenotypes were defined, combining OBPM with each of the remaining methods: normotension, white-coat, masked, and sustained hypertension. Using OBPM + ABPM, T2DM patients were less often classified as normotensive (32.5% vs. 48.3%) and more often as having masked hypertension (23.2% vs. 9.9%) than controls (p = 0.004). Both OBPM + HBPM and OBPM + u-AOBP underestimated masked hypertension and overestimated with-coat hypertension. When compared with OBPM + ABPM, concordance in the classification of participants into four phenotypes (κ, 95%CI) was higher for OBPM + HBPM (T2DM: 0.62, 0.52 - 0.71; controls: 0.70, 0.60-0.80) than for OBPM + u-AOBP (T2DM: 0.51, 0.40-0.61; controls: 0.61, 0.50-0.72) and lower among participants with T2DM. Recently diagnosed T2DM patients showed a higher prevalence of masked hypertension than participants without T2DM. When combined with OBPM, HBPM and u-AOBP failed to identify a large proportion of patients with masked hypertension and overestimated white-coat hypertensions, highlighting the need to incorporate ABPM into evaluation protocols.
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.