A critique of hypertension treatment trials and of their evaluation.

Abstract

Progressive improvements in antihypertensive drug therapy over the past four decades have provided clear benefits in limiting cardiovascular complications. Unfortunately, and largely inexplicably, the inclusion in meta-analyses of defective trials plus the employment of inappropriate diagnostic criteria for adverse coronary events have led to spurious, exaggerated claims for the advantages of such treatment. The consequence has been a devaluation of the very real worth of prophylactic drug therapy for hypertension.