Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 342

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Single Versus Combined Blood Pressure Components and Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: The Framingham Heart Study

Open access
Franklin, Stanley S., Lopez, Victor A., Wong, Nathan D., Mitchell, Gary F., Larson, Martin G., Vasan, Ramachandran S., Levy, Daniel·2009·Circulation
DOI 10.1161/circulationaha.108.797936
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background— The utility of single versus combined blood pressure (BP) components in predicting cardiovascular disease (CVD) events is not established. We compared systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) versus pulse pressure (PP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) combined and each of these 4 BP components alone in predicting CVD events. Methods and Results— In participants in the original (n=4760) and offspring (n=4897) Framingham Heart Study who were free of CVD events and BP-lowering therapy, 1439 CVD events occurred over serial 4-year intervals from 1952 to 2001. In pooled logistic regression with the use of BP categories, combining SBP with DBP and PP with MAP improved model fit compared with individual BP components ( P <0.05 to P <0.0001). Significant interactions were noted between SBP and DBP ( P =0.02) and between PP and MAP ( P =0.01) in their respective multivariable models. Models with continuous variables for SBP+DBP and PP+MAP proved identical in predicting CVD events (Akaike Information Criteria=10 625 for both). Addition of a quadratic DBP 2 term to DBP and SBP further improved fit ( P =0.0016). Conclusions— Combining PP with MAP and SBP with DBP produced models that were superior to single BP components for predicting CVD, and the extent of CVD risk varied with the level of each BP component. The combination of PP+MAP (unlike SBP+DBP) has a monotonic relation with risk and may provide greater insight into hemodynamics of altered arterial stiffness versus impaired peripheral resistance but is not superior to SBP+DBP in predicting CVD events.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.108.797936

Cites

37 of 37 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 37 references

Cited by

See all 342

Metadata

Authors
Franklin, S. S., Lopez, V. A., Wong, N. D., Mitchell, G. F., Larson, M. G., Vasan, R. S., & Levy, D.
Venue
Circulation
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2009-01-20
Volume
119
Issue
2
Pages
243-250
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
DOI
10.1161/circulationaha.108.797936
OpenAlex
W2067951525
Cited by
342
References
37
FWCI
10.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Single Versus Combined Blood Pressure Components and Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: The Framingham Heart Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.108.797936
The paper
Franklin, S. S., Lopez, V. A., Wong, N. D., Mitchell, G. F., Larson, M. G., Vasan, R. S., & Levy, D. (2009). Single Versus Combined Blood Pressure Components and Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.108.797936

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.