Key result
Self-reported hypertension demonstrated acceptable validity with a sensitivity of 75.5% and specificity of 96.4% compared to objective clinical measurements.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to determine the validity of self-reported hypertension and identify factors affecting discordance between self-reported and objectively measured hypertension in the RaNCD cohort.
Does self-reported hypertension accurately reflect objectively measured hypertension in adults aged 35-65 years in Iran?
Cohort (n=10,065)
No
Does self-reported hypertension accurately reflect objectively measured hypertension in adults aged 35-65 years in Iran?
Effect estimate: Sensitivity 75.5% (95% CI 73.3-77.5)
Self-reported hypertension demonstrates acceptable sensitivity and high specificity, suggesting it is a viable tool for public health surveillance in settings lacking comprehensive screening programs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports self-reported hypertension for surveillance in limited-resource settings; leaves open validation across broader populations.
Najafi et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Hypertension (n=10,065). Self-reported hypertension vs. Objectively measured hypertension was evaluated on Sensitivity of self-reported hypertension (Sensitivity 75.5%, 95% CI 73.3-77.5). Self-reported hypertension demonstrated acceptable validity with a sensitivity of 75.5% and specificity of 96.4% compared to objective clinical measurements.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: