Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 297

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality Improvement Strategies for Hypertension Management: A Systematic Review

Walsh, Judith M. E., McDonald, Kathryn M., Shojania, Kaveh G., Sundaram, Vandana, Nayak, Smita, Lewis, Robyn, Owens, Douglas K., Goldstein, Mary Kane·2006·Medical Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Care remains suboptimal for many patients with hypertension. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of quality improvement (QI) strategies in lowering blood pressure. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, and article bibliographies were searched for this study. STUDY SELECTION: Trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series evaluating QI interventions targeting hypertension control and reporting blood pressure outcomes were studied. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers abstracted data and classified QI strategies into categories: provider education, provider reminders, facilitated relay of clinical information, patient education, self-management, patient reminders, audit and feedback, team change, or financial incentives were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Forty-four articles reporting 57 comparisons underwent quantitative analysis. Patients in the intervention groups experienced median reductions in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) that were 4.5 mm Hg (interquartile range [IQR]: 1.5 to 11.0) and 2.1 mm Hg (IQR: -0.2 to 5.0) greater than observed for control patients. Median increases in the percentage of individuals achieving target goals for SBP and DBP were 16.2% (IQR: 10.3 to 32.2) and 6.0% (IQR: 1.5 to 17.5). Interventions that included team change as a QI strategy were associated with the largest reductions in blood pressure outcomes. All team change studies included assignment of some responsibilities to a health professional other than the patient's physician. LIMITATIONS: Not all QI strategies have been assessed equally, which limits the power to compare differences in effects between strategies. CONCLUSION: QI strategies are associated with improved hypertension control. A focus on hypertension by someone in addition to the patient's physician was associated with substantial improvement. Future research should examine the contributions of individual QI strategies and their relative costs.

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 · 10.1097/01.mlr.0000220260.30768.32

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 297

Metadata

Authors
Walsh, J. M. E., McDonald, K. M., Shojania, K. G., Sundaram, V., Nayak, S., Lewis, R., Owens, D. K., & Goldstein, M. K.
Venue
Medical Care
Published
2006-07
Volume
44
Issue
7
Pages
646-657
ISSN
0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2068129753
Cited by
297
References
8
FWCI
8.97
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: Quality Improvement Strategies for Hypertension Management: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.mlr.0000220260.30768.32
The paper
Walsh, J. M. E., McDonald, K. M., Shojania, K. G., Sundaram, V., Nayak, S., Lewis, R., Owens, D. K., & Goldstein, M. K. (2006). Quality Improvement Strategies for Hypertension Management: A Systematic Review. Medical Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000220260.30768.32

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.