Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 312

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Pulse Pressure and Cardiovascular Disease–Related Mortality: Follow-up Study of the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT)

Domanski, Michael, Mitchell, Gary, Pfeffer, Marc, Neaton, James D., Norman, James, Svendsen, Kenneth, Grimm, Richard, Cohen, Jerome, Stamler, Jeremiah, for the MRFIT Research Group·2002·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: The sixth Joint National Committee (JNC-VI) classification system of blood pressure emphasizes both systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for cardiovascular disease risk assessment. Pulse pressure may also be a valuable risk assessment tool. OBJECTIVE: To compare relationships of SBP, DBP, and pulse pressure, separately and jointly, with cardiovascular disease-related mortality in men. DESIGN AND SETTING: Data from the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT), which screened men aged 35 to 57 years from 1973 through 1975 at 22 US centers, was used to assess cardiovascular disease-related mortality through 1996. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 342 815 men without diabetes or a history of myocardial infarction were divided into 2 groups based on their age at MRFIT screening (35- to 44-year-olds and 45- to 57-year olds). Participant blood pressure levels were classified into a JNC-VI blood pressure category based on SBP and DBP (optimal, normal but not optimal, high normal, stage 1 hypertension, stage 2-3 hypertension), and pulse pressure was calculated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cardiovascular disease-related mortality. RESULTS: There were 25 721 cardiovascular disease-related deaths. Levels of SBP and DBP were more strongly related to cardiovascular disease than pulse pressure. Relationships of SBP, DBP, and pulse pressure to cardiovascular disease-related mortality varied within JNC-VI category. Concordant elevations of SBP and DBP were associated with a greater risk of cardiovascular disease-related mortality for both age groups of men. Among men aged 45 to 57 years, higher SBP and lower DBP (discordant elevations) also yielded a greater risk of cardiovascular disease-related mortality. CONCLUSION: In both age groups, cardiovascular disease risk assessment was improved by considering both SBP and DBP, not just SBP, DBP, or pulse pressure separately.

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.287.20.2677

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 312

Metadata

Authors
Domanski, M., Mitchell, G., Pfeffer, M., Neaton, J. D., Norman, J., Svendsen, K., Grimm, R., Cohen, J., Stamler, J., & for the MRFIT Research Group
Venue
JAMA
Published
2002-05-22
Volume
287
Issue
20
Pages
2677
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2148522477
Cited by
312
References
0
FWCI
13.49
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pulse Pressure and Cardiovascular Disease–Related Mortality: Follow-up Study of the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.287.20.2677
The paper
Domanski, M., Mitchell, G., Pfeffer, M., Neaton, J. D., Norman, J., Svendsen, K., Grimm, R., Cohen, J., Stamler, J., & for the MRFIT Research Group. (2002). Pulse Pressure and Cardiovascular Disease–Related Mortality: Follow-up Study of the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT). JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.20.2677

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.