A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control
2015 · paper · Clinical trials
A randomized trial of 9,361 non-diabetic, high-risk people comparing a systolic blood-pressure target below 120 versus below 140 mm Hg. Stopped early, intensive treatment lowered cardiovascular events and deaths but caused more serious adverse events such as hypotension and kidney injury.
0 findings
None that passed a second check.
5 minor (typos and the like; most checked by the judge only)
Wording Methods say "Clinical and laboratory data were obtained at baseline and every 3 months thereafter", while Table 3 footnote § says "routine laboratory tests were performed at 1 month, then quarterly during the first year, then every 6 months".
- p. 4 Methods, Study Measurements, first paragraph
Clinical and laboratory data were obtained at baseline and every 3 months thereafter.
- p. 22 Table 3, footnote §
routine laboratory tests were performed at 1 month, then quarterly during the first year, then every 6 months
Judge's note: Read both passages in the crops. The two schedules differ on the 1-month test and on the frequency after year 1. The Methods sentence reads as a loose summary of the visit schedule (page 4 also says participants were seen monthly for 3 months, then every 3 months); the footnote is the specific laboratory schedule. No statement in the article reconciles them, but no reported number depends on it.
Second check: another model agreed
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Stray hyphen inside an unbroken word: "on the basis of the Framing-ham risk score" should read "Framingham".
- p. 3 Methods, Study Population
on the basis of the Framing-ham
Judge's note: Crop of page 3 shows "Framing-ham" complete at the end of one line, with "risk score" starting the next; the word is not split across lines, so the hyphen is a leftover. Table 1 (page 17) prints "Framingham".
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Inconsistent spelling within one paragraph: "associated with a nonsignificant 19% lower incidence of stroke" and, three lines later, "SPRINT had a non-significant 11% lower incidence of stroke".
- p. 9 Discussion, paragraph on stroke (SPS3, ACCORD, SPRINT)
SPRINT had a non-significant 11% lower incidence of stroke
- p. 9 Discussion, same paragraph, two lines earlier
associated with a nonsignificant
Judge's note: Crop of page 9 shows both forms; "non-significant" sits mid-line and is not a line-break hyphen. Page 8 also uses "(nonsignificant)". Page 8 has a similar mid-line "under-powered". Cosmetic only.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Reference 16 title is missing a space: "first-line agents: asystematic review and meta-analysis" should read "a systematic review".
- p. 11 Reference list, reference 16
asystematic review and meta-analysis
- p. 11 Reference 16
first-line agents: asystematic review and meta-analysis
Judge's note: Crop of the reference list on page 11 shows "asystematic" as one word mid-line; it is not a text-layer artefact.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Table 3 footnote ¶ reads "Orthostatic hypertension was defined as a drop in systolic blood pressure of at least 20 mm Hg…". The footnote belongs to the row "Orthostatic hypotension¶", so it should say "Orthostatic hypotension".
- p. 22 Table 3, footnote ¶
Orthostatic hypertension was defined as a drop in systolic blood pressure of at least 20 mm Hg
- p. 21 Table 3, row heading carrying the ¶ footnote
Orthostatic hypotension
- p. 22
Orthostatic hypertension was defined as a drop in systolic blood pressure
- p. 21 Table 3, Monitored clinical events
Orthostatic hypotension¶
Judge's note: I checked both page images. On p.21 the Table 3 row heading reads "Orthostatic hypotension¶". On p.22 the matching ¶ footnote reads "Orthostatic hypertension was defined as a drop in systolic blood pressure…". A drop in pressure on standing is hypotension, so the word in the footnote is wrong. It is not an extraction artefact, because the image shows the same word as the text layer. The files contain no erratum or correction notice. This is a one-word slip and the definition makes the intended meaning clear, so I rated it cosmetic.
Second check: another model agreed