Literature DB >> 11692037

Are two really better than one? Empirical examination of repeat blood pressure measurements and stroke risk in the Renfrew/Paisley and collaborative studies.

C L Hart1, D J Hole, G Davey Smith.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Blood pressure measured on 2 occasions in 2 large prospective cohort studies in Scotland was related to stroke, defined as stroke mortality or hospital admission for stroke. The purpose was to investigate whether 2 blood pressure readings gave a more accurate estimate of stroke risk over a long follow-up period than 1 reading.
METHODS: In the 1970s, the Renfrew/Paisley general population study investigated 3060 men and 3502 women and the Collaborative study investigated 2683 employed men on 2 occasions. The mean years between screening were 4 and 5, respectively. Blood pressure measured on the 2 occasions was related to stroke risk in 17-year and 21-year follow-up periods after the second screening, respectively.
RESULTS: For both systolic and diastolic blood pressure, the mean of the measures on the 2 occasions, the maximum of the 2 measures and the measure corrected for regression dilution was more strongly related to stroke over the follow-up periods than either single measure.
CONCLUSIONS: Two blood pressure measurements seem better than 1 for indicating stroke risk. Underestimation using single measures will lead to both misclassification of the risk of disease for individuals and also the population-attributable risk of disease associated with elevated blood pressure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11692037     DOI: 10.1161/hs1101.098637

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stroke        ISSN: 0039-2499            Impact factor:   7.914


  5 in total

1.  Risk of progression to hypertension in a low-income Mexican population with prehypertension and normal blood pressure.

Authors:  Aida Jimenez-Corona; Ruy Lopez-Ridaura; Michael P Stern; Clicerio Gonzalez-Villalpando
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.689

2.  Cardiorespiratory risk factors as predictors of 40-year mortality in women and men.

Authors:  J E Ferrie; A Singh-Manoux; M Kivimäki; J Mindell; E Breeze; G Davey Smith; M J Shipley
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  Misclassification and discordance of measured blood pressure from patient's true blood pressure in current clinical practice: a clinical trial simulation case study.

Authors:  Yuyan Jin; Robert Bies; Marc R Gastonguay; Norman Stockbridge; Jogarao Gobburu; Rajanikanth Madabushi
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 4.  A review of the reporting and handling of missing data in cohort studies with repeated assessment of exposure measures.

Authors:  Amalia Karahalios; Laura Baglietto; John B Carlin; Dallas R English; Julie A Simpson
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Increased predictive ability of BMI but not other risk factors with time in men: 39-year follow-up of total mortality in the Oslo Study.

Authors:  Ingar Holme; Serena Tonstad
Journal:  Obes Facts       Date:  2014-10-09       Impact factor: 3.942

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.