Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 544

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Reduced Dietary Sodium on Blood Pressure: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Midgley, Julian Paul·1996·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.1996.03530440070039
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: - To ascertain whether restriction of dietary sodium lowers blood pressure in hypertensive and normotensive individuals. DATA SOURCES: - An English-language computerized literature search, restricted to human studies with Medical Subject Heading terms, "hypertension," "blood pressure," "vascular resistance," "sodium and dietary," "diet and sodium restricted," "sodium chloride," "clinical trial," "randomized controlled trial," and "prospective studies," was conducted. Bibliographies of review articles and personal files were also searched. TRIAL SELECTION: - Trials that had randomized allocation to control and dietary sodium intervention groups, monitored by timed sodium excretion, with outcome measures of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure were selected by blinded review of the methods section. DATA EXTRACTION: - Two observers extracted data independently, using purpose-designed forms, and discrepancies were resolved by discussion. DATA SYNTHESIS: - The 56 trials that met our inclusion criteria showed significant heterogeneity. Publication bias was also evident. The mean reduction (95% confidence interval) in daily urinary sodium excretion, a proxy measure of dietary sodium intake, was 95 mmol/d (71-119 mmol/d) in 28 trials with 1131 hypertensive subjects and 125 mmol/d (95-156 mmol/d) in 28 trials with 2374 normotensive subjects. After adjustment for measurement error of urinary sodium excretion, the decrease in blood pressure for a 100-mmol/d reduction in daily sodium excretion was 3.7 mm Hg (2.35-5.05 mm Hg) for systolic (P<.001) and 0.9 mm Hg (-0.13 to 1.85 mm Hg) for diastolic (P=.09) in the hypertensive trials, and 1.0 mm Hg (0.51-1.56 mm Hg) for systolic (P<.001) and 0.1 mm Hg (-0.32 to 0.51 mm Hg) for diastolic (P=.64) in the normotensive trials. Decreases in blood pressure were larger in trials of older hypertensive individuals and small and nonsignificant in trials of normotensive individuals whose meals were prepared and who lived outside the institutional setting. CONCLUSION: - Dietary sodium restriction for older hypertensive individuals might be considered, but the evidence in the normotensive population does not support current recommendations for universal dietary sodium restriction.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1996.03530440070039

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Midgley, J. P.
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
1996-05-22
Volume
275
Issue
20
Pages
1590
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.1996.03530440070039
OpenAlex
W1978229420
Cited by
544
References
2
FWCI
34.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.