What Is New and Different in the 2024 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the Management of Elevated Blood Pressure and Hypertension?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2024, the European Society of Cardiology released a new guideline for the management of elevated blood pressure (BP) and hypertension. The guideline introduced a new BP categorization: (1) nonelevated (office BP <120/70 mm Hg) for which drug treatment is not recommended, (2) elevated (120-139/70-89 mm Hg) for which drug treatment is recommended based on cardiovascular disease risk and follow-up BP level, and (3) hypertension (≥140/90 mm Hg) for which prompt confirmation and drug treatment are recommended in most individuals. The initial default systolic BP treatment target is 120 to 129 mm Hg; however, relaxed targets (BP as low as reasonably achievable) are recommended in case of treatment intolerance, adults ≥85 years, symptomatic orthostasis, moderate-to-severe frailty, or limited life expectancy. Here, we summarize what is new and different in the 2024 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, relative to other major international hypertension guidelines in Europe and America. Our aim is to reconcile any uncertainty clinicians may have about implementing these various guidelines in patient care.
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 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".