The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 3 are not checked yet.
A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The most appropriate targets for systolic blood pressure to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among persons without diabetes remain uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 9361 persons with a systolic blood pressure of 130 mm Hg or higher and an increased cardiovascular risk, but without diabetes, to a systolic blood-pressure target of less than 120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or a target of less than 140 mm Hg (standard treatment). The primary composite outcome was myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS: At 1 year, the mean systolic blood pressure was 121.4 mm Hg in the intensive-treatment group and 136.2 mm Hg in the standard-treatment group. The intervention was stopped early after a median follow-up of 3.26 years owing to a significantly lower rate of the primary composite outcome in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group (1.65% per year vs. 2.19% per year; hazard ratio with intensive treatment, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.89; P<0.001). All-cause mortality was also significantly lower in the intensive-treatment group (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.90; P=0.003). Rates of serious adverse events of hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormalities, and acute kidney injury or failure, but not of injurious falls, were higher in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at high risk for cardiovascular events but without diabetes, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, resulted in lower rates of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events and death from any cause, although significantly higher rates of some adverse events were observed in the intensive-treatment group. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01206062.).
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial, 261 patients at high cardiovascular risk who were already using antihypertensive drugs targeting a systolic BP of 120 mmHg had an approximately twofold risk of syncope vs. the control group targeting a systolic BP of 140 mmHg.”
From 2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (2018) · cites this paper as [261]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The results have been interpreted to be generally consistent between the two trials, but ACCORD BP was viewed as underpowered due to the composite primary end point being less sensitive to blood pressure regulation (38,40).”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Adverse outcomes, including hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormality, and acute kidney injury (AKI), were more common in the intensive treatment arm; risk of adverse outcomes needs to be weighed against the cardiovascular benefit of more intensive blood pressure lowering.”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The primary composite outcome of MI, coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes was reduced by 25% in the intensive treatment group.”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) demonstrated that treatment to a goal systolic blood pressure of <120 mmHg decreases cardiovascular event rates by 25% in high-risk individuals, although people with diabetes were excluded from this trial (38).”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The results of BPROAD and ESPRIT are supported by the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), which demonstrated that treatment to a goal systolic blood pressure of <120 mmHg decreases cardiovascular event rates by 25% in high-risk individuals, although people with diabetes were excluded from this trial (44).”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026 (2026) · cites this paper as [44]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Adverse outcomes, including hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormality, and acute kidney injury (AKI), were more common in the intensive treatment arm”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026 (2026) · cites this paper as [44]
In the citing paper
“in which there was a notable 25% relative/0.5% absolute reduced risk per year of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality with intensive (<120 mm Hg) as compared with standard (<140 mm Hg) systolic blood pressure control in patients with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk.71”
From Clinical management of stable coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association (2020) · cites this paper as [71]
In the citing paper
“This graded approach is based on evidence from multiple meta-analyses and individual RCTs, which show a consistent and graded reduction in CVD risk in response to reductions in TC and LDL-C levels. 61-71”
From 2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias (2016) · cites this paper as [70]
In the citing paper
“These trials are consistent in showing that the higher the initial LDL-C level, the greater the absolute reduction in risk, while the relative risk reduction remains constant at any given baseline LDL-C level.”
From 2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias (2016) · cites this paper as [70]
In the citing paper
“The primary composite outcome of myocardial infarction (MI), coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes was reduced by 25% in the intensive treatment group.”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023 (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) demonstrated that treatment to a target systolic blood pressure of < 120 mmHg decreases cardiovascular event rates by 25% in high-risk patients, although people with diabetes were excluded from this trial (33).”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023 (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Of note, the ACCORD BP and SPRINT trials targeted a similar systolic blood pressure < 120 mmHg, but in contrast to SPRINT, the primary composite cardiovascular end point was nonsigni fi cantly reduced in ACCORD BP.”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023 (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“The achieved systolic blood pressures in the trial were 121 mmHg and 136 mmHg in the intensive versus standard treatment group, respectively.”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023 (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Adverse outcomes, including hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormality, and acute kidney injury were more common in the intensive treatment arm; risk of adverse outcomes needs to be weighed against the cardiovascular bene fi t of more intensive blood pressure lowering.”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023 (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“The results have been interpreted to be generally consistent between both trials, but ACCORD BP was viewed as underpowered due to the composite primary end point being less sensitive to blood pressure regulation (33).”
From 10. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023 (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
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
Chobanian, A. V. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.19.2560 · Cited by 25,386
A Proportional Hazards Model for the Subdistribution of a Competing Risk
Fine, J. P., & Gray, R. J. (1999) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1999.10474144 · Cited by 14,290
Lim, S. S., Vos, T., Flaxman, A. D., Danaei, G., Shibuya, K., Adair-Rohani, H., AlMazroa, M. A., Amann, M., Anderson, H. R., Andrews, K. G., et al. (2012) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61766-8 · Cited by 11,805
Ahmed, A., Jorna, T., & Bhandari, S. (2016) · The Nephron journals/Nephron journals · doi:10.1159/000447068 · Cited by 11,782
Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data
Kearney, P. M., Whelton, M., Reynolds, K., Muntner, P., Whelton, P. K., & He, J. (2005) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(05)17741-1 · Cited by 8,698
The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group (2002) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.288.23.2981 · Cited by 5,664
Self-citationHeart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2014 Update
Go, A. S., Mozaffarian, D., Roger, V. L., Benjamin, E. J., Berry, J. D., Blaha, M. J., Dai, S., Ford, E. S., Fox, C. S., Franco, S., et al. (2013) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000441139.02102.80 · Cited by 5,264
Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease
Collins, R., Peto, R., MacMahon, S., Godwin, J., Qizilbash, N., Collins, R., MacMahon, S., Hebert, P., Eberlein, K. A., Taylor, J. O., et al. (1990) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(90)90944-z · Cited by 4,491
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)70151-3 · DOI
- Franklin SS, 1999, Pathol Biol (Paris), 47, 594
- Nwankwo T, 2013, NCHS Data Brief, 133, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
McDonagh, T. A., Metra, M., Adamo, M., Gardner, R. S., Baumbach, A., Böhm, M., Burri, H., Butler, J., Čelutkienė, J., Chioncel, O. D., et al. (2021) · PubMed · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab670 · Cited by 20,604
2021 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure
McDonagh, T. A., Metra, M., Adamo, M., Gardner, R. S., Baumbach, A., Böhm, M., Burri, H., Butler, J., Čelutkienė, J., Chioncel, O., et al. (2021) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab368 · Cited by 13,344
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Benjamin, E. J., Blaha, M. J., Chiuve, S. E., Cushman, M., Das, S. R., Deo, R., de Ferranti, S. D., Floyd, J., Fornage, M., Gillespie, C., et al. (2017) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000485 · Cited by 12,591
2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure
Ponikowski, P., Voors, A. A., Anker, S. D., Bueno, H., Cleland, J. G. F., Coats, A. J. S., Falk, V., González-Juanatey, J. R., Harjola, V.-P., Jankowska, E. A., et al. (2016) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehw128 · Cited by 11,429
From local explanations to global understanding with explainable AI for trees
Lundberg, S. M., Erion, G., Chen, H., DeGrave, A., Prutkin, J. M., Nair, B., Katz, R., Himmelfarb, J., Bansal, N., & Lee, S.-I. (2020) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9 · Cited by 10,551
Metadata
- Authors
- The SPRINT Research Group
- Affiliations
- University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- The SPRINT Research Group
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2015-11-26
- Volume
- 373
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 2103-2116
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- PMC
- PMC4689591
- OpenAlex
- W3150595609
- Cited by
- 6,325
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 390 · 2025: 449 · 2024: 437 · 2023: 498 · 2022: 523 · 2021: 602 · 2020: 570 · 2019: 694 · 2018: 734 · 2017: 767 · 2016: 613 · 2015: 40
- FWCI
- 522.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000093, UL1TR000050, UL1TR001427, UL1TR000073, UL1TR001064, UL1TR001085, UL1TR000002, UL1TR000075, UL1TR000064, UL1TR000005, UL1TR000433, UL1TR000003, UL1TR000445, UL1TR000439, UL1TR000105)
- National Institute on Aging (P30AG021332)
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HHSN268200900040C, A-HL-13-002-001, HHSN268200900049C, HHSN268200900048C, HHSN268200900047C, HHSN268200900046C)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P30GM103337)
- National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR025755, UL1RR024134, UL1RR025752, UL1RR025771)
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (9U54TR000017‐06)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Sodium Intake and Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
- Keywords
- intensive blood pressure control, systolic blood pressure target, antihypertensive therapy, cardiovascular risk, cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, adverse events, hypotension, acute kidney injury, non-diabetic patients
- MeSH terms
- Age Factors, Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cause of Death, Female, Goals, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Practice Guidelines as Topic
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
