Thiazide diuretics are one of the preferred pharmacologic treatments for hypertension. Hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone have been the 2 most commonly used diuretics in major clinical trials. Treatment guidelines and compendia often consider these 2 drugs interchangeable agents within the class of thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics. Many sources list them as equipotent. Despite these beliefs, there is some suggestion that cardiovascular outcomes are not necessarily the same with these 2 drugs. We conducted a literature search from 1960 to 2003 to identify studies that evaluated the pharmacokinetic and blood pressure-lowering effects of these 2 agents. There are significant pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences between these diuretics. Chlorthalidone is approximately 1.5 to 2.0 times as potent as hydrochlorothiazide, and the former has a much longer duration of action. Whether these pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic features cause differences in outcomes is not known.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
21
15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
8
6%
Chemistry
7
5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance
2
1%
Other
11
8%
Unknown
43
31%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 75. 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 06 April 2024.
All research outputs
#724,837
of 34,545,128 outputs
Outputs from Hypertension
#370
of 9,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,066
of 199,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hypertension
#3
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,545,128 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 199,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
