↓ Skip to main content

Comparative effectiveness of physical activity interventions and anti-hypertensive pharmacological interventions in reducing blood pressure in people with hypertension: protocol for a systematic…

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
24 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative effectiveness of physical activity interventions and anti-hypertensive pharmacological interventions in reducing blood pressure in people with hypertension: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0791-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Noone, C. P. Dwyer, J. Murphy, J. Newell, G. J. Molloy

Abstract

The prevalence of hypertension is a major public health challenge. Despite it being highly preventable, hypertension is responsible for a significant proportion of global morbidity and mortality. Common methods for controlling hypertension include prescribing anti-hypertensive medication, a pharmacological approach, and increasing physical activity, a behavioural approach. In general, little is known about the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological and behavioural approaches for reducing blood pressure in hypertension. A previous network meta-analysis suggested that physical activity interventions may be just as effective as many anti-hypertensive medications in preventing mortality; however, this analysis did not provide the comparative effectiveness of these disparate modes of intervention on blood pressure reduction. The primary objective of this study is to use network meta-analysis to compare the relative effectiveness, for blood pressure reduction, of different approaches to increasing physical activity and different first-line anti-hypertensive therapies in people with hypertension. A systematic review will be conducted to identify studies involving randomised controlled trials which compare different types of physical activity interventions and first-line anti-hypertensive therapy interventions to each other or to other comparators (e.g. placebo, usual care) where blood pressure reduction is the primary outcome. We will search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and PsycInfo. For studies which meet our inclusion criteria, two reviewers will extract data independently and assess the quality of the literature using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Network meta-analyses will be conducted to generate estimates of comparative effectiveness of each intervention class and rankings of their effectiveness, in terms of reduction of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. This study will provide evidence regarding the comparability of two common first-line treatment options for people with hypertension. It will also describe the extent to which there is direct evidence regarding the comparative effectiveness of increasing physical activity and initiating anti-hypertensive therapy. PROSPERO CRD42017070579.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Master 11 9%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Lecturer 5 4%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 63 51%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 12%
Sports and Recreations 5 4%
Unspecified 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 69 56%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2018.
All research outputs
#1,626,489
of 24,498,639 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#255
of 2,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,120
of 337,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#8
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,498,639 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,129 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,757 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.