Cardiovascular effects of tight versus usual blood-pressure control/Authors' reply

[...] although Verdecchia and colleagues recognise the effect of lack of double-blinding on clinical decisions related to secondary outcome events, they do not acknowledge that this bias may have indirectly contributed to the higher incidence of LVH in the usual-control group. [...] the potential dr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Lancet (British edition) 2009-11, Vol.374 (9703), p.1741
Main Authors: Rai, Saurabh, Nandan, Nidhi, Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi, Pandey, Nihar R, Green, Jonas B, Richards, Adam K, Verdecchia, Paolo, Angeli, Fabio, Staessen, Jan A, Reboldi, Gianpaolo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Colleges & universities
Health services
Hospitals
Hypertension
Internal medicine
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue 9703
container_start_page 1741
container_title The Lancet (British edition)
container_volume 374
creator Rai, Saurabh
Nandan, Nidhi
Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi
Pandey, Nihar R
Green, Jonas B
Richards, Adam K
Verdecchia, Paolo
Angeli, Fabio
Staessen, Jan A
Reboldi, Gianpaolo
description [...] although Verdecchia and colleagues recognise the effect of lack of double-blinding on clinical decisions related to secondary outcome events, they do not acknowledge that this bias may have indirectly contributed to the higher incidence of LVH in the usual-control group. [...] the potential drug combinations were so many to preclude any meaningful comparison. [...] since the readers of electrocardiographic tracings were unaware of the randomisation code, the potential bias introduced by the open design did not extend to the assessment of LVH, the primary endpoint of the study.
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_199054331</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1907192341</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_1990543313</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNi7sKwjAUQIMoWB__EFyciglJWzpKUZzFwa3ENrUtobfemxT8ex38AKcznHNmLJI603Gis_ucRUJqEaeZSpdsRdQLIXQqkohdC4N1B5OhKjiD3DaNrTxxaLjvnq3nk0UKxAMF4_jDAdTxiJYooOUVDB7BHY7Bt4C052hH996wRWMc2e2Pa7Y7n27F5fvBK1jyZQ8Bh68qZZ6LRCsl1V_RBw5TQZY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>199054331</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cardiovascular effects of tight versus usual blood-pressure control/Authors' reply</title><source>Elsevier:Jisc Collections:Elsevier Read and Publish Agreement 2022-2024:Freedom Collection (Reading list)</source><creator>Rai, Saurabh ; Nandan, Nidhi ; Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi ; Pandey, Nihar R ; Green, Jonas B ; Richards, Adam K ; Verdecchia, Paolo ; Angeli, Fabio ; Staessen, Jan A ; Reboldi, Gianpaolo</creator><creatorcontrib>Rai, Saurabh ; Nandan, Nidhi ; Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi ; Pandey, Nihar R ; Green, Jonas B ; Richards, Adam K ; Verdecchia, Paolo ; Angeli, Fabio ; Staessen, Jan A ; Reboldi, Gianpaolo</creatorcontrib><description>[...] although Verdecchia and colleagues recognise the effect of lack of double-blinding on clinical decisions related to secondary outcome events, they do not acknowledge that this bias may have indirectly contributed to the higher incidence of LVH in the usual-control group. [...] the potential drug combinations were so many to preclude any meaningful comparison. [...] since the readers of electrocardiographic tracings were unaware of the randomisation code, the potential bias introduced by the open design did not extend to the assessment of LVH, the primary endpoint of the study.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0140-6736</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1474-547X</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LANCAO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Elsevier Limited</publisher><subject>Colleges &amp; universities ; Health services ; Hospitals ; Hypertension ; Internal medicine</subject><ispartof>The Lancet (British edition), 2009-11, Vol.374 (9703), p.1741</ispartof><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Nov 21-Nov 27, 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rai, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nandan, Nidhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandey, Nihar R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Jonas B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richards, Adam K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verdecchia, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angeli, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staessen, Jan A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reboldi, Gianpaolo</creatorcontrib><title>Cardiovascular effects of tight versus usual blood-pressure control/Authors' reply</title><title>The Lancet (British edition)</title><description>[...] although Verdecchia and colleagues recognise the effect of lack of double-blinding on clinical decisions related to secondary outcome events, they do not acknowledge that this bias may have indirectly contributed to the higher incidence of LVH in the usual-control group. [...] the potential drug combinations were so many to preclude any meaningful comparison. [...] since the readers of electrocardiographic tracings were unaware of the randomisation code, the potential bias introduced by the open design did not extend to the assessment of LVH, the primary endpoint of the study.</description><subject>Colleges &amp; universities</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Hypertension</subject><subject>Internal medicine</subject><issn>0140-6736</issn><issn>1474-547X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNi7sKwjAUQIMoWB__EFyciglJWzpKUZzFwa3ENrUtobfemxT8ex38AKcznHNmLJI603Gis_ucRUJqEaeZSpdsRdQLIXQqkohdC4N1B5OhKjiD3DaNrTxxaLjvnq3nk0UKxAMF4_jDAdTxiJYooOUVDB7BHY7Bt4C052hH996wRWMc2e2Pa7Y7n27F5fvBK1jyZQ8Bh68qZZ6LRCsl1V_RBw5TQZY</recordid><startdate>20091121</startdate><enddate>20091121</enddate><creator>Rai, Saurabh</creator><creator>Nandan, Nidhi</creator><creator>Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi</creator><creator>Pandey, Nihar R</creator><creator>Green, Jonas B</creator><creator>Richards, Adam K</creator><creator>Verdecchia, Paolo</creator><creator>Angeli, Fabio</creator><creator>Staessen, Jan A</creator><creator>Reboldi, Gianpaolo</creator><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>0TT</scope><scope>0TZ</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8C2</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KB~</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20091121</creationdate><title>Cardiovascular effects of tight versus usual blood-pressure control/Authors' reply</title><author>Rai, Saurabh ; Nandan, Nidhi ; Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi ; Pandey, Nihar R ; Green, Jonas B ; Richards, Adam K ; Verdecchia, Paolo ; Angeli, Fabio ; Staessen, Jan A ; Reboldi, Gianpaolo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_1990543313</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Colleges &amp; universities</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Hypertension</topic><topic>Internal medicine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rai, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nandan, Nidhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandey, Nihar R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Jonas B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richards, Adam K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verdecchia, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angeli, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staessen, Jan A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reboldi, Gianpaolo</creatorcontrib><collection>News PRO</collection><collection>Pharma and Biotech Premium PRO</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Lancet Titles</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Newsstand Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rai, Saurabh</au><au>Nandan, Nidhi</au><au>Tiwari-Pandey, Rashmi</au><au>Pandey, Nihar R</au><au>Green, Jonas B</au><au>Richards, Adam K</au><au>Verdecchia, Paolo</au><au>Angeli, Fabio</au><au>Staessen, Jan A</au><au>Reboldi, Gianpaolo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cardiovascular effects of tight versus usual blood-pressure control/Authors' reply</atitle><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle><date>2009-11-21</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>374</volume><issue>9703</issue><spage>1741</spage><pages>1741-</pages><issn>0140-6736</issn><eissn>1474-547X</eissn><coden>LANCAO</coden><abstract>[...] although Verdecchia and colleagues recognise the effect of lack of double-blinding on clinical decisions related to secondary outcome events, they do not acknowledge that this bias may have indirectly contributed to the higher incidence of LVH in the usual-control group. [...] the potential drug combinations were so many to preclude any meaningful comparison. [...] since the readers of electrocardiographic tracings were unaware of the randomisation code, the potential bias introduced by the open design did not extend to the assessment of LVH, the primary endpoint of the study.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Elsevier Limited</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0140-6736
ispartof The Lancet (British edition), 2009-11, Vol.374 (9703), p.1741
issn 0140-6736
1474-547X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_199054331
source Elsevier:Jisc Collections:Elsevier Read and Publish Agreement 2022-2024:Freedom Collection (Reading list)
subjects Colleges & universities
Health services
Hospitals
Hypertension
Internal medicine
title Cardiovascular effects of tight versus usual blood-pressure control/Authors' reply
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T11%3A24%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cardiovascular%20effects%20of%20tight%20versus%20usual%20blood-pressure%20control/Authors'%20reply&rft.jtitle=The%20Lancet%20(British%20edition)&rft.au=Rai,%20Saurabh&rft.date=2009-11-21&rft.volume=374&rft.issue=9703&rft.spage=1741&rft.pages=1741-&rft.issn=0140-6736&rft.eissn=1474-547X&rft.coden=LANCAO&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E1907192341%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_1990543313%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=199054331&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true