The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of High-Normal Blood Pressure on the Risk of Cardiovascular Disease
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Information is limited regarding the absolute and relative risk of cardiovascular disease in persons with high-normal blood pressure (systolic pressure of 130 to 139 mm Hg, diastolic pressure of 85 to 89 mm Hg, or both). METHODS: We investigated the association between blood-pressure category at base line and the incidence of cardiovascular disease on follow-up among 6859 participants in the Framingham Heart Study who were initially free of hypertension and cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: A stepwise increase in cardiovascular event rates was noted in persons with higher baseline blood-pressure categories. The 10-year cumulative incidence of cardiovascular disease in subjects 35 to 64 years of age who had high-normal blood pressure was 4 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 2 to 5 percent) for women and 8 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 6 to 10 percent) for men; in older subjects (those 65 to 90 years old), the incidence was 18 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 12 to 23 percent) for women and 25 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 17 to 34 percent) for men. As compared with optimal blood pressure, high-normal blood pressure was associated with a risk-factor-adjusted hazard ratio for cardiovascular disease of 2.5 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.1) in women and 1.6 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.2) in men. CONCLUSIONS: High-normal blood pressure is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Our findings emphasize the need to determine whether lowering high-normal blood pressure can reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect
Cook, R. J., & Sackett, D. L. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.310.6977.452 · Cited by 1,885
An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of Treatment
Laupacis, A., Sackett, D. L., & Roberts, R. S. (1988) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198806303182605 · Cited by 1,681
Neaton, J. D. (1992) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.1992.00400130082009 · Cited by 784
van den Hoogen, P. C. W., Feskens, E. J. M., Nagelkerke, N. J. D., Menotti, A., Nissinen, A., & Kromhout, D. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200001063420101 · Cited by 552
Cited by
Chobanian, A. V., Bakris, G. L., Black, H. R., Cushman, W. C., Green, L. A., Izzo, J. L., Jones, D. W., Materson, B. J., Oparil, S., Wright, J. T., et al. (2003) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/01.hyp.0000107251.49515.c2 · Cited by 13,271
A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control
The SPRINT Research Group (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1511939 · Cited by 6,325
Mancia, G., Fagard, R., Narkiewicz, K., Redón, J., Zanchetti, A., Böhm, M., Christiaens, T., Cifkova, R., De Backer, G., Dominiczak, A., et al. (2013) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/01.hjh.0000431740.32696.cc · Cited by 5,655
Diabetic nephropathy: diagnosis, prevention, and treatment
Gross, J. L., de Azevedo, M. J., Silveiro, S. P., Canani, L. H., Caramori, M. L., & Zelmanovitz, T. (2005) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.28.1.164 · Cited by 1,839
Metadata
- Authors
- Vasan, R. S., Larson, M. G., Leip, E. P., Evans, J. C., O'Donnell, C. J., Kannel, W. B., & Levy, D.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 345
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 1291-1297
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2037580369
- Cited by
- 2,082
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 46.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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.