PMC:6927068 / 13203-15600 JSONTXT

{"project":"testtesttest","denotations":[{"id":"T68","span":{"begin":145,"end":154},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T69","span":{"begin":1445,"end":1450},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T70","span":{"begin":1491,"end":1496},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A68","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T68","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0001595"},{"id":"A69","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T69","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000178"},{"id":"A70","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T70","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000178"}],"text":"Table 1. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) summary of 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing auricular acupressure plus antihypertensive drugs (AAPADs) to antihypertensive drugs (ADs) alone in hypertension patients.\nPatient or population: patients with hypertensionSettings: inpatients/outpatientsIntervention: AAPADComparison: AD\nOutcomes Illustrative comparative risks a (95% CI) Relative effect(95% CI) No. of participants(studies) Quality of the evidence(GRADE) Comments\nAssumed risk Corresponding risk\nAD AAPAD\nSBP change magnitude between baseline and post-intervention The mean SBP change magnitude between baseline and post-intervention in the control groups was 135.73 The mean SBP change magnitude between baseline and post-intervention in the intervention groups was 5.06 lower (6.76 to 3.36 lower) 929(10 studies) ⊕⊕⊕⊝Moderateb\nDBP change magnitude between baseline and post-intervention The mean DBP change magnitude between baseline and post-intervention in the control groups was 84.75 The mean DBP change magnitude between baseline and post-intervention in the intervention groups was 5.3 lower (6.27 to 4.33 lower) 929(10 studies) ⊕⊕⊕⊝Moderateb\nEfficacy rate Study population RR 1.22 (1.17–1.26) 2017 (21 studies) ⊕⊕⊝⊝Lowb,c\n731 per 1000 892 per 1000 (855–921)\nModerate\n740 per 1000 903 per 1000 (866–932)\nCI: Confidence interval; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; RR: risk ratio; SBP: systolic blood pressure; ROB: risk of bias.\nGRADE Working Group grades of evidence: High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect; Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate; Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate; Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate.\na The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in these footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).\nb According to the ROB graph (Supplementary Material Figure 1).\nc Funnel plot was asymmetrical."}