Hypertension Limbo: Balancing Benefits, Harms, and Patient Preferences Before We Lower the Bar on Blood Pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Editorials6 March 2018Hypertension Limbo: Balancing Benefits, Harms, and Patient Preferences Before We Lower the Bar on Blood PressureTimothy J. Wilt, MD, MPH, Devan Kansagara, MD, MCR, and Amir Qaseem, MD, PhD, for the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of PhysiciansTimothy J. Wilt, MD, MPHMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota (T.J.W.), Devan Kansagara, MD, MCRPortland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Portland, Oregon (D.K.), and Amir Qaseem, MD, PhDAmerican College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (A.Q.), for the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of PhysiciansAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/M17-3293 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail The recent hypertension guideline from the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and partner organizations—a synopsis of which is in this issue (1)—raises important questions about hypertension diagnosis and treatment. The guideline differs substantially from those of other organizations, including the American College of Physicians (ACP) and the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) (2). Here, we examine these differences, focusing on pharmacologic treatment of adults older than 60 years. Strengths of the ACC/AHA guideline include its emphasis on the importance of blood pressure (BP) measurement technique and lifestyle changes. However, the guideline falls short in ...References1. Carey RM, Whelton PK; 2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guideline Writing Committee. Prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults: synopsis of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association hypertension guideline. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168:351-8. doi:10.7326/M17-3203 LinkGoogle Scholar2. Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Rich R, Humphrey LL, Frost J, Forciea MA; Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians and the Commission on Health of the Public and Science of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Pharmacologic treatment of hypertension in adults aged 60 years or older to higher versus lower blood pressure targets: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166:430-7. [PMID: 28135725]. doi:10.7326/M16-1785 LinkGoogle Scholar3. Doust J, Vandvik PO, Qaseem A, Mustafa RA, Horvath AR, Frances A, et al; Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) Preventing Overdiagnosis Working Group. Guidance for modifying the definition of diseases: a checklist. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:1020-5. [PMID: 28505266] doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1302 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Welch HG, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Overdiagnosed: Making People Sick in the Pursuit of Health. Boston: Beacon Pr; 2011:1-31. Google Scholar5. Haynes RB, Sackett DL, Taylor DW, Gibson ES, Johnson AL. Increased absenteeism from work after detection and labeling of hypertensive patients. N Engl J Med. 1978;299:741-4. [PMID: 692548] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Wright JT, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, Snyder JK, Sink KM, Rocco MV, et al; SPRINT Research Group. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2103-16. [PMID: 26551272] doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1511939 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Wei Y, Jin Z, Shen G, Zhao X, Yang W, Zhong Y, et al. Effects of intensive antihypertensive treatment on Chinese hypertensive patients older than 70 years. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2013;15:420-7. [PMID: 23730991] doi:10.1111/jch.12094 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Lonn EM, Bosch J, López-Jaramillo P, Zhu J, Liu L, Pais P, et al; HOPE-3 Investigators. Blood-pressure lowering in intermediate-risk persons without cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:2009-20. [PMID: 27041480] doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1600175 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, Dahlöf B, Elmfeldt D, Julius S, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial. HOT Study Group. Lancet. 1998;351:1755-62. [PMID: 9635947] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Gandhi TK, Weingart SN, Borus J, Seger AC, Peterson J, Burdick E, et al. Adverse drug events in ambulatory care. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1556-64. [PMID: 12700376] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota (T.J.W.)Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Portland, Oregon (D.K.)American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (A.Q.)Disclosures: Authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest. Forms can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M17-3293.Corresponding Author: Amir Qaseem, MD, PhD, American College of Physicians, 190 N. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106; e-mail, [email protected]org.Current Author Addresses: Dr. Wilt: Minneapolis VA Health Care System, 1 Veterans Drive (111-0), Minneapolis, MN 55417.Dr. Kansagara: Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Mailcode RD71, 3710 SW US Veterans Hospital Road, Portland, OR 97239.Dr. Qaseem: American College of Physicians, 190 N. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106.This article was published at Annals.org on 23 January 2018. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoThe 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Hypertension Guideline: A Resource for Practicing Clinicians Robert M. Carey and Paul K. Whelton Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: Synopsis of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Hypertension Guideline Robert M. Carey , Paul K. Whelton , and Annals On Call - Hypertension Limbo Robert M. Centor and Devan Kansagara Metrics Cited byRecomendaciones preventivas cardiovasculares. Actualización PAPPS 2022Benefits and Harms of Hypertension and High-Normal Labels: A Randomized ExperimentBlood pressure control and complex health conditions in older adults: impact of recent hypertension management guidelinesEffectively Prescribing Oral Magnesium Therapy for Hypertension: A Categorized Systematic Review of 49 Clinical TrialsDevelopment of an item pool for a questionnaire on the psychosocial consequences of hypertension labellingStart und Ziele der BlutdrucktherapieAHA/ACC-defined stage 1 hypertensive adults do not display cutaneous microvascular endothelial dysfunctionPatients with elevated blood pressure or stage 1 hypertension have structural heart diseaseIdentifying patterns and predictors of lifestyle modification in electronic health record documentation using statistical and machine learning methodsPersonnalisation du rapport bénéfice/risque du traitement de l'hypertension artérielleHypertension Management in Nursing Homes: Review of Evidence and Considerations for CareCost-Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Therapy in Patients Older Than 80 Years: Cohort Study and Markov ModelPotential of Stratified Medicine for High Blood Pressure ManagementConsistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of HypertensionReforming disease definitions: a new primary care led, people-centred approachDoes the benefit from treating to lower blood pressure targets vary with age? A systematic review and meta-analysisClinical outcomes and economic impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines on hypertension in ChinaThe new US and European guidelines in hypertension: A multi-dimensional analysisHypertensionJames Brian Byrd, MD, MS and Robert D. Brook, MDTarget blood pressure level for the treatment of elderly hypertensive patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trialsImplications of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Hypertension Guideline in a Modern Primary Prevention Multi-Ethnic Prospective Cohort (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis)Prevalence of Hypertension, Treatment, and Blood Pressure Targets in Canada Associated With the 2017 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Blood Pressure GuidelinesOnline decision aids for primary cardiovascular disease prevention: systematic search, evaluation of quality and suitability for low health literacy patientsMedia Coverage of the Benefits and Harms of the 2017 Expanded Definition of High Blood PressureCardiovascular Disease and Mortality in Adults Aged ≥60 Years According to Recommendations by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and American College of Physicians/American Academy of Family PhysiciansPotential Cardiovascular Disease Events Prevented with Adoption of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Blood Pressure GuidelineBenefits and Harms of Antihypertensive Treatment in Low-Risk Patients With Mild HypertensionSearching for an Optimal Systolic Blood Pressure Target: A Balance of Benefits and RisksFirst-Year Anniversary of the 2017 Hypertension GuidelineHipertensão arterial sistêmica: atualização no diagnóstico e tratamentoThe new hypertension guideline: logical but unwiseGeneralizing Intensive Blood Pressure Treatment to Adults With Diabetes MellitusThe Blood Pressure LandscapeUsefulness of a Simple Algorithm to Identify Hypertensive Patients Who Benefit from Intensive Blood Pressure LoweringClinical Precision in the Management of HypertensionHypertension. What do new guides bring up to date? 6 March 2018Volume 168, Issue 5Page: 369-370KeywordsBlood pressureCardiovascular disease riskCardiovascular diseasesDrug therapyElderlyFallsHypertensionMortalityRenal diseasesTreatment guidelines ePublished: 23 January 2018 Issue Published: 6 March 2018 PDF downloadLoading ...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.015 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".