Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Jul 16;16(7):e0254699. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254699

Comparison of efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative therapies for essential hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder

Xueyan Han 1,#, Xinxin Liu 1,#, Fengxing Zhong 2, Yiguo Wang 2, Qiming Zhang 1,2,*
Editor: Ismaeel Yunusa3
PMCID: PMC8284674  PMID: 34270618

Abstract

Background

Essential hypertension (EH) with anxiety or depression belongs to the category of psycho-cardiology. Hypertension is closely related to anxiety and depression. The adverse reactions of Western medicine are apparent and the compliance is poor. Supplementary and replacement therapies have accumulated rich experience in clinical practices, which can reduce side effects and improve clinical efficacy. This study intends to use the Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) analysis method for the first time to gather randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to complementary and alternative therapies in the treatment of hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder and rank efficacy and safety, to provide a reference basis for the treatment of hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder.

Methods

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registered and ongoing trials of Chinese and English databases, related to supplementation and replacement therapies of EH with anxiety or depression disorder, published from initial state to February 2021, will be collected in the form of computer retrieval. Two researchers will independently screen the literature, extracting data, assessing bias risk and assessing heterogeneity. We will use software WinBUGS 1.4.3 and Stata 16.0 for pairwise meta-analysis and NMA to comprehensively evaluate various interventions. The quality of evidence will be evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Results

This NMA will comprehensively compare and rank the efficacy and safety of a series of complementary and alternative therapies in treating EH with anxiety or depression disorder.

Conclusion

Supplementary and replacement therapies have accumulated rich experience of clinical practices in improving EH with anxiety or depression disorder. We expect that this NMA will guide practice and research by providing reliable evidence of evidence-based medicine for the treatment of EH with anxiety or depression disorder.

Protocol registration number

INPLASY202120068.

Introduction

Psycho-cardiology, which was put forward by James W. Jefferson for the first time [1], mainly studies the relationship between psychological diseases and cardiovascular diseases. Patients with cardiovascular diseases are often associated with anxiety or depression disorder, while hypertension is more likely to occur depression or anxiety among the common and frequently-occurring cardiovascular diseases.

In recent years, the prevalence of essential hypertension (EH) in China has increased. Hypertension is a primary risk factor for high morbidity and mortality of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases worldwide. The World Health Organization has reported that 54% of stroke and 47% of ischemic heart disease are direct consequences of hypertension [2]. Although the epidemiological association between hypertension and cardiovascular disease morbidity/mortality is well known, and there is sufficient evidence to justify antihypertensive treatment, blood pressure (BP) is still not fully controlled. The reason may be the neglect of the intervention of psychological factors. Studies have shown that anxiety and depression are recognized risk factors for the development of EH, which augment the risk of death of cardiovascular disease, especially hypertension, by 4 times [3, 4].

Hypertension is closely related to anxiety and depression [5]. The incidence of hypertension complicated with anxiety and depression is 15–50% [6]. The incidence of depression in patients with hypertension is higher than that in patients with normal BP [7], and about 11.6% of middle-aged and elderly patients with hypertension are complicated with anxiety disorder [8]. Cohen et al. [9] have shown that anxiety can change the circadian rhythm of BP, leading to nocturnal hypertension and morning hypertension. Kayano et al. [10] after monitoring the ambulatory BP of 120 patients with hypertension, it was found that the night and early morning BP of patients with anxiety was higher than patients without anxiety, and the anxiety group was more likely to have anti-dipper BP. A meta-analysis included 9 related articles involving 22367 subjects with an average follow-up period of 9.6 years [11]. The results showed that depressive patients had a 1.42-fold higher risk of developing hypertension than non-depressive patients after adjusting for other risk factors. Depression can lead to elevated BP and then develop into systolic hypertension [12].

The mechanism of anxiety and depression leading to the increase of BP is roughly in 3 aspects. First, anxiety can affect the vascular endothelial function by activating the sympathetic nerve, causing the vascular endothelium to release vasoactive substances out of balance and affect the regulation of BP [5, 13]. Secondly, anxiety and depression can activate the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis system, promoting the secretion of glucocorticoids, improving the sensitivity of vascular smooth muscle to catecholamines, and promote the occurrence and progression of hypertension [14, 15]. Finally, anxiety and depression can activate the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAAS), which leads to an increase in BP [16].

EH with anxiety or depression belongs to the category of psycho-cardiology. In terms of treatment, we should not only treat hypertension but also pay more attention to psychological diseases in order to achieve an excellent antihypertensive effect. Western medicine is often combined with anti-anxiety drugs or antidepressants. Although the anxiety and depression of patients are alleviated to some extent, many adverse reactions such as respiratory inhibition, mental fatigue, addiction, gastrointestinal reactions and so on are bad for the quality of life of patients. Another significant problem in treating anti-anxiety drugs or antidepressants is poor compliance, with about 50% of patients discontinuing prescription drugs in the first month of medication [17]. Studies have shown that tricyclic antidepressants and antidepressants that lower adrenaline and serotonin may lead to grade 1 hypertension in patients [18]. Supplementary and replacement therapies have accumulated rich experience in clinical practices, which can reduce side effects and improve clinical efficacy. Yoga, Tai Chi and Qigong are recognized as the complementary approaches for patients with anxiety or depression to improve sleep quality and reduce blood pressure [19]. Some studies have proved that yoga, slow walking, swimming and cycling can effectively relieve symptoms of anxiety and depression [20]. The modified Da Chaihu decoction was beneficial for hypertensive patients with anxiety in reducing BP [21]. Brief mindfulness meditation could significantly reduce anxiety symptoms and lower systolic blood pressure of Chinese nursing students [22].

The network meta-analysis (NMA) can be used to compare three or more interventions simultaneously, and can provide the probability of choosing the best intervention. This study intends to use the Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) analysis method for the first time to gather randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to complementary and alternative therapies in the treatment of hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder and rank efficacy and safety, to provide a reference basis for the treatment of hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder.

Methods

This NMA will be implemented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) details [23]. The protocol was registered on the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY). No: INPLASY202120068.

Ethics and dissemination

This study is based on published data, and so it does not require ethical approval. The results of this NMA will be presented at scientific conferences and published in a peer-review journal.

Inclusion criteria

Type of study

The type of study is RCTs related to complementary and alternative therapies for EH complicated with anxiety or depression disorder, and the languages are Chinese and English.

Participants

  1. Patients who have diagnosed EH (SBP≥140 mmHg or DBP≥90mmHg, according to the diagnostic criteria of the Guidelines for Prevention and Control of Hypertension in 2010), with anxiety or depression disorder (according to the score of any validated scales).

  2. It is not affected by the age, sex and region of the included patients.

Interventions

The control group was treated with or without conventional hypotensive drugs, at the same time, with or without anti-anxiety drugs or antidepressants. The treatment group was treated with complementary replacement therapies on the basis of the control group. The complementary replacement therapies include biological-based therapies, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), acupuncture, massage, qigong, moxibustion, yoga, Chinese herbal medicines, music therapy, five-animal exercises, cognitive-behavioral therapy, relaxation training, tai chi, mindfulness meditation, and so on. They can also be used without conventional hypotensive drugs.

Outcomes

Primary outcomes include the change of SBP and DBP, the change in score of any validated scales, such as HAMA, HAMD, or SAS, SDS, which can assess the severity of anxiety or depression. The total efficacy rate, stationarity of hypotension, adverse effects, and TCM symptoms score are secondary outcomes.

Exclusion criteria

  1. The type of study is non-RCTs;

  2. The subjects included were diagnosed patients with secondary hypertension;

  3. Patients without anxiety or depression;

  4. Studies of unknown specific inclusion, exclusion criteria, and intervention measures;

  5. There are obvious errors or the research data are unknown and cannot be extracted.

Databases and retrieval strategy

Chinese and English databases such as MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Biosis, CNKI, Wanfang Database, Weipu Database and China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc) and so on will be searched by two independent researchers. RCTs, related to supplementation and replacement therapies of EH with anxiety or depression disorder, which were published from initial state to February 2021, will be collected in the form of computer retrieval. For the researches on incomplete information or some problems in the data, the corresponding author will be contacted to supplement the missing data as much as possible. At the same time, references of systematic review/meta-analysis as well as registered and ongoing trials will be traced. Take PubMed as an example, and the retrieval strategy is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Search strategy for PubMed.

NO. Search item
#1 Essential Hypertension [MeSH]
#2 Essential Hypertension[Title/Abstract] OR High Blood Pressure[Title/Abstract] OR Hypertension[Title/Abstract] OR Blood Pressure[Title/Abstract] OR Psycho-cardiology[Title/Abstract] OR Psychocardiology[Title/Abstract]
#3 #1 OR #2
#4 Depression[MeSH]
#5 Depressions[Title/Abstract] OR Emotional Depressions[Title/Abstract] OR Depression, Emotional [Title/Abstract] OR Depressive Symptom[Title/Abstract] OR Symptom, Depressive[Title/Abstract] OR Depressions, Emotional [Title/Abstract] OR Emotional Depression[Title/Abstract] OR Depressive Symptoms [Title/Abstract] OR Symptoms, Depressive [Title/Abstract] OR Depression Disorder [Title/Abstract]
#6 #4 OR #5
#7 Anxiety[MeSH]
#8 Anxiety[Title/Abstract] OR Anxiety Disorder[Title/Abstract] OR Emotional Anxieties[Title/Abstract] OR Anxiety, Emotional[Title/Abstract] OR Symptom, Anxious[Title/Abstract] OR Anxieties, Emotional[Title/Abstract] OR Emotional Anxiety[Title/Abstract] OR Anxious Symptom[Title/Abstract] OR Symptoms, Anxious [Title/Abstract] OR Anxious Symptoms [Title/Abstract]
#9 #7 OR #8
#10 #3 AND #6
#11 #3 AND #9
#12 #10 OR #11
#13 Complementary Therapies[MeSH]
#14 Therapy, Alternative[Title/Abstract] OR Complementary and Alternative Therapies[Title/Abstract] OR Complementary Medicine[Title/Abstract] OR Alternative Therapies[Title/Abstract] OR Medicine, Complementary[Title/Abstract] OR Alternative Medicine[Title/Abstract] OR Complementary Therapies[Title/Abstract] OR Medicine, Alternative[Title/Abstract] OR Therapy, Complementary[Title/Abstract]
#15 #13 OR #14
#16 Chinese Herbal Medicines[Title/Abstract] OR Yoga[Title/Abstract] OR Exercise[Title/Abstract] OR Music Therapy[Title/Abstract] OR Chinese Medicine[Title/Abstract]OR Biological-based Therapies[Title/Abstract] OR Five-Animal Frolics Exercise[Title/Abstract] OR Acupuncture[Title/Abstract] OR Massage[Title/Abstract] OR Cognitive-behavioral Therapy[Title/Abstract] OR Relaxation Training[Title/Abstract] OR Traditional Chinese Medicine[Title/Abstract] OR Tai chi[Title/Abstract] OR Qigong[Title/Abstract] OR Moxibustion[Title/Abstract] OR Massage[Title/Abstract] OR Mindfulness Meditation[Title/Abstract]
#17 #15 OR #16
#18 Randomized Controlled Trial[Publication Type] OR Controlled Clinical Trial[Publication Type] OR Randomized[Title/Abstract] OR Randomly[Title/Abstract]
#19 #12 AND #17 AND #18

Literature screening and data extraction

Literature screening: according to the retrieval strategy, the two researchers will check all the databases independently, and obtain all the studies related to this research. Then, by reading the title and abstract of studies, the studies which have nothing to do with the research will be excluded. Finally, we will read through the full text and screen the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria mentioned above. The data will be imported into Endnote X9 software (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA USA).

Data extraction: the chart of literature information will be drawn, and the two researchers will independently extract the information from the included researches. The level of agreement between the two researchers will be analysed by using the Kappa value [24], and if the value is greater than 0.60, it means substantial/almost perfect agreement. The extracted information will include: title, first author, race, gender, sources of participants, course of disease, publication time, country, journal, the support of the fund, the sources of the original literature, the number of cases in each group, inclusion and exclusion criteria, intervention measures and implementation details, primary and secondary outcomes, follow-up period, method of randomized allocation, allocation concealment, blinding, loss of follow-up or withdrawal, security, ethics, etc.

Assessment of trial quality

The quality of literature will be scored according to the Jadad scale [25]. The Jadad score of the selected literature should be greater than or equal to 3. In case of disagreement, consult the third party to decide.

Statistical analysis

Pairwise meta-analysis

Stata 16.0 software will be used for statistical analysis. The ratio (OR) will be used as the index for the counting data, and the mean difference (MD) will be used for the measurement data. The 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of each effect size will be given. A p-value <0.05 will be considered significant. We will combine with I2 to quantitatively judge the size of heterogeneity.

Network meta-analysis

In this paper, the NMA is mainly based on the Bayesian theory to compare all the intervention measures and make a comprehensive evaluation at the same time. We will use I2 or p–value to determine the types of model. If I2 > 50% or p ≤ 0.05, it indicates that there is heterogeneity, and we will use the random-effect model. If I2 ≤ 50% or p > 0.05, we will use the fixed-effect model. When there is heterogeneity, we will probe the sources of heterogeneity through sensitivity analysis or subgroup analysis. Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) in WinBUGS1.4.3 is a method of the joint posterior distribution by constructing simulation parameters of Markov-chain. The steps are as follows: checking model logic and syntax, importing data, and compiling. In this study, three chains will be selected for simulation, with 40000 iterations and 10,000 annealing times. Gelman-Rubin-Brooks will be used to evaluate the convergence of the model. The higher the surface under the cumulative ranking curve values (SUCRA) indicates that the better the efficacy of the intervention [26]. And then the efficacy of the intervention measures included in the end will be ranked.

Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis

We will divided data into smaller units according to different design scheme, quality of literature, publishing year, etc., to make a further comparison.

After excluding the studies with abnormal results, the NMA will be carried out again, and the results are compared with the results of NMA, which does not exclude the studies with abnormal results, so as to probe the influence of the studies on the merger effect. The methods of sensitivity analysis include including or excluding those controversial studies on whether they meet the inclusion criteria, excluding studies with low quality, using different statistical methods to re-analyze data, and so on.

Assessment of inconsistency

IF and 95% CI will be calculated. The consistency of closed loops will be evaluated by 95% CI. We can also use the node splitting method to analyze each node of NMA and compare the difference of direct and indirect comparison. If P > 0.05, it means that there is no inconsistency.

Evaluation of publication bias and evidence quality

The included data will be tested by Begg´s and Egger´s funnel plot to evaluate whether there are publication bias and the effect of small sample size. If the included studies are concentrated near the midline and symmetrically distributed, it shows that the publication bias has little influence on this research. On the contrary, there will be publication bias.

The quality of evidence is divided into five levels—risk of bias, indirectness, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias—in NMA according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) [27]. GRADE is used to evaluate the level of evidence and recommendation intensity.

Discussion

There is often a causal relationship between hypertension and psychological disorders. The prevalence rate of hypertension in patients with anxiety or depression is significantly higher than that in patients without anxiety or depression. On the contrary, the risk of anxiety and depression in patients with hypertension is significantly higher than that in patients without hypertension [2830]. It plays a vital role in each other’s occurrence and development, which increases the difficulty in the treatment of hypertension [31, 32].

At present, It is difficult to achieve a satisfactory antihypertensive response by conventional hypotensive drugs for EH with anxiety or depression disorder and the side effects are obvious. Complementary and replacement therapies of EH with anxiety or depression disorder play an increasingly vital role. However, there are many kinds of complementary and replacement therapies and the efficacy is uneven, so it is difficult to choose the best scheme in the clinic. This will be the first NMA to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of different complementary and alternative therapies for EH with anxiety or depression disorder, and then we will rank them in order to get the best regimen, which can guide the clinical treatment.

We expect that this NMA will guide practice and research by providing reliable evidences of evidence-based medicine for treatment of EH with anxiety or depression disorder. Nevertheless, this study also has some limitations. For example, the use of different anxiety and depression scales in different studies may lead to publication bias.

Supporting information

S1 Checklist. PRISMA-P checklist.

(DOC)

Funding Statement

This study is supported by Key R & D Program of the People's Republic of China (2019YFC1711700).QZ received the award. URL=http://www.cncbd.org.cn/. The funders had and will not have a role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Jefferson JW. Psychocardiology: meeting place of heart and mind. Psychosomatics. 1985;26(11):841–842. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(85)72774-0 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Barquera S, Campos-Nonato I, Hernández-Barrera L, Villalpando S, Rodríguez-Gilabert C, Durazo-Arvizú R, et al. Hypertension in Mexican adults: results from the National Health and Nutrition Survey 2006. Salud Publica Mex. 2010;52 Suppl 1:S63–S71. doi: 10.1590/s0036-36342010000700010 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Shinohara Y; OASIS Study Group. Factors affecting health-related quality of life assessed with the SF-36v2 health survey in outpatients with chronic-stage ischemic stroke in Japan—cross-sectional analysis of the OASIS study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2010;29(4):361–371. doi: 10.1159/000281834 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Rimar L, Rimar D. [Depression, myocardial infarction and the immune system—the chicken before the egg problem]. Harefuah. 2004;143(1):73–78, 83. . Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14748293/. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Liu MY, Li N, Li WA, Khan H. Association between psychosocial stress and hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurol Res. 2017;39(6):573–580. doi: 10.1080/01616412.2017.1317904 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Egan BM, Zhao Y, Axon RN. US trends in prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension, 1988–2008. JAMA. 2010;303(20):2043–2050. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.650 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Hamer M, Batty GD, Stamatakis E, Kivimaki M. Hypertension awareness and psychological distress. Hypertension. 2010;56(3):547–550. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.153775 110.153775. . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Almas A, Patel J, Ghori U, Ali A, Edhi AI, Khan MA. Depression is linked to uncontrolled hypertension: a case-control study from Karachi, Pakistan. J Ment Health. 2014;23(6):292–296. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2014.924047 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cohen BE, Edmondson D, Kronish IM. State of the Art Review: Depression, Stress, Anxiety, and Cardiovascular Disease. Am J Hypertens. 2015;28(11):1295–1302. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpv047 Epub 2015 Apr 24. . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kayano H, Koba S, Matsui T, Fukuoka H, Toshida T, Sakai T, et al. Anxiety disorder is associated with nocturnal and early morning hypertension with or without morning surge: ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Circ J. 2012;76(7):1670–1677. doi: 10.1253/circj.cj-11-1085 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Meng L, Chen D, Yang Y, Zheng Y, Hui R. Depression increases the risk of hypertension incidence: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. J Hypertens. 2012;30(5):842–851. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e32835080b7 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Lang UE, Borgwardt S. Molecular mechanisms of depression: perspectives on new treatment strategies. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2013;31(6):761–777. doi: 10.1159/000350094 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Pan Y, Cai W, Cheng Q, Dong W, An T, Yan J. Association between anxiety and hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2015;11:1121–30. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S77710 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ismail Z, Mohamad M, Isa MR, Fadzil MA, Yassin SM, Ma KT, et al. Factors associated with anxiety among elderly hypertensive in primary care setting. J Ment Health. 2015;24(1):29–32. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2014.971148 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Hamer M, Steptoe A. Cortisol responses to mental stress and incident hypertension in healthy men and women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97(1):E29–E34. doi: 10.1210/jc.2011-2132 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ho AK, Thorpe CT, Pandhi N, Palta M, Smith MA, Johnson HM. Association of anxiety and depression with hypertension control: a US multidisciplinary group practice observational study. J Hypertens. 2015;33(11):2215–2222. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000693 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Gardner DM, Baldessarini RJ, Waraich P. Modern antipsychotic drugs: a critical overview. CMAJ. 2005;172(13):1703–1711. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.1041064 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Licht CM, de Geus EJ, Seldenrijk A, van Hout HP, Zitman FG, van Dyck R, et al. Depression is associated with decreased blood pressure, but antidepressant use increases the risk for hypertension. Hypertension. 2009;53(4):631–638. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.108.126698 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zou L, Yeung A, Li C, Wei GX, Chen KW, Kinser PA, et al. Effects of Meditative Movements on Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Clin Med. 2018;7(8):195. doi: 10.3390/jcm7080195 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Carek PJ, Laibstain SE, Carek SM. Exercise for the treatment of depression and anxiety. Int J Psychiatry Med. 2011;41(1):15–28. doi: 10.2190/PM.41.1.c . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zhang XD, Cheng WQ, Wang YG, Zhang Z. [Clinical observation of modified Da Chaihu decoction in treating essential hypertension with anxiety]. Zhongguo Zhong Yao Za Zhi. 2017;42(11):2181–2186. doi: 10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.2017.0099 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Chen Y, Yang X, Wang L, Zhang X. A randomized controlled trial of the effects of brief mindfulness meditation on anxiety symptoms and systolic blood pressure in Chinese nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2013;33(10):1166–1172. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2012.11.014 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g7647 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther. 2005;85(3):257–268. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(1):1–12. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(2):163–171. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.016 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Puhan MA, Schünemann HJ, Murad MH, Li T, Brignardello-Petersen R, Singh JA, et al. GRADE Working Group. A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2014;349:g5630. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g5630 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Stein DJ, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Alonso J, Bruffaerts R, de Jonge P, Liu Z, et al. Associations between mental disorders and subsequent onset of hypertension. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2014;36(2):142–149. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.11.002 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Wang H, Zhang X, Zhang J, He Q, Hu R, Wang L, et al. Factors associated with prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension among adults in Southern China: a community-based, cross-sectional survey. PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e62469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062469 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Rubio-Guerra AF, Rodriguez-Lopez L, Vargas-Ayala G, Huerta-Ramirez S, Serna DC, Lozano-Nuevo JJ. Depression increases the risk for uncontrolled hypertension. Exp Clin Cardiol. 2013. Winter;18(1):10–12. . Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24294029/. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Saxena T, Ali AO, Saxena M. Pathophysiology of essential hypertension: an update. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2018;16(12):879–887. doi: 10.1080/14779072.2018.1540301 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Ginty AT, Carroll D, Roseboom TJ, Phillips AC, de Rooij SR. Depression and anxiety are associated with a diagnosis of hypertension 5 years later in a cohort of late middle-aged men and women. J Hum Hypertens. 2013;27(3):187–190. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2012.18 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Ismaeel Yunusa

20 May 2021

PONE-D-21-05843

Comparison of efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative therapies for essential hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder

A Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zhang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 04 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ismaeel Yunusa, PharmD, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Please submit a revised version addressing reviewer comments based on guidance from PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols). Resubmit along with PRISMA-P checklist

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1) Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2) We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions?

The research question outlined is expected to address a valid academic problem or topic and contribute to the base of knowledge in the field.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses?

The manuscript should describe the methods in sufficient detail to prevent undisclosed flexibility in the experimental procedure or analysis pipeline, including sufficient outcome-neutral conditions (e.g. necessary controls, absence of floor or ceiling effects) to test the proposed hypotheses and a statistical power analysis where applicable. As there may be aspects of the methodology and analysis which can only be refined once the work is undertaken, authors should outline potential assumptions and explicitly describe what aspects of the proposed analyses, if any, are exploratory.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable?

Descriptions of methods and materials in the protocol should be reported in sufficient detail for another researcher to reproduce all experiments and analyses. The protocol should describe the appropriate controls, sample size calculations, and replication needed to ensure that the data are robust and reproducible.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics.

You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study.

(Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dr. Xueyan Han and co-workers aimed to perform a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) method for the first time to gather randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to complementary and alternative therapies in the treatment of hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder and rank efficacy and safety, to provide a reference basis for the treatment hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder. I have several concerns.

1. In the results of the Abstract, the authors wrote that “This NMA will comprehensively compare and rank the efficacy and safety of a series of complementary and alternative therapies in treating EH with anxiety or depression disorder”. Could the authors provide how many methods for therapy in treating EH with anxiety or depression disorder were planned to compare?

2. In Literature screening and data extraction of methods, could the authors consider providing the Kapa value between the two researchers?

3. In subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis of Methods, the authors wrote that "the methods of sensitivity analysis include excluding unpublished studies………." but this could be erroneous to do, because the authors included studies that were published from the initial state to February 2021. Please revise.

4. In network meta-analysis of statistical analysis, the authors didn’t write what model was used to synthesis the data while the MCMC method was just a method used to estimate the unknown parameters. Please revise.

5. In the section on publication bias, the authors didn’t write which method was planned to use for testing the publishing bias. Please revise.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Jul 16;16(7):e0254699. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254699.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


30 Jun 2021

Thank you so much for your time and efforts! We profoundly appreciate your comments toward the improvement of the paper and we hope what we have addressed the majority of your comments. Responses to your comments along with a description of the changes made on the manuscript are given below.

- Additional Editor Comments (if provided)

Point. Please submit a revised version addressing reviewer comments based on guidance from PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols). Resubmit along with PRISMA-P checklist

Response: Thank you very much for your carefulness and comment! We revised PRISMA-P addressing reviewer comments based on guidance from PRISMA-P and resubmitted a revised version of PRISMA-P.

- Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Point 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Response 1: Thank you very much for your suggestion! We carefully checked PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming, to make sure that our manuscripts met the requirements.

Point 2. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

Response 2: Thank you very much for your carefulness and comment! We have made changes to ensure that Table 1 is explicitly referenced in the manuscript. "Take PubMed as an example, and the retrieval strategy is shown in Table 1." In line 169-170.

- Reviewer #1

Point 1. In the results of the Abstract, the authors wrote that “This NMA will comprehensively compare and rank the efficacy and safety of a series of complementary and alternative therapies in treating EH with anxiety or depression disorder”. Could the authors provide how many methods for therapy in treating EH with anxiety or depression disorder were planned to compare?

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript! For essential hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder, on the basis of conventional antihypertensive drugs, complementary and alternative therapies, such as Chinese herbal medicines, yoga, music therapy, biological-based therapies, five-animal frolics exercise, acupuncture, massage, cognitive-behavioral therapy, relaxation training, traditional Chinese medicine, tai chi, qigong, moxibustion, mindfulness meditation, etc., can be compared with antihypertensive drugs combined (or not combined) with western medicines with anti-anxiety or anti-depression. They can also be used without conventional hypotensive drugs. These complementary and alternative methods can be found in interventions of inclusion criteria of Methods.

Point 2. In literature screening and data extraction of methods, could the authors consider providing the Kapa value between the two researchers?

Response 2: Thank you very much for your suggestion! In literature screening and data extraction of methods, we think that providing the Kapa value between the two researchers is more objective and reasonable, and we have decided to adopt your suggestion. For the revised details, please refer to the line 182-184 of the revised manuscript. "The level of agreement between the two researchers will be analysed by using the Kappa value, and if the value is greater than 0.60, it means substantial/almost perfect agreement."

Point 3. In subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis of Methods, the authors wrote that "the methods of sensitivity analysis include excluding unpublished studies………." but this could be erroneous to do, because the authors included studies that were published from the initial state to February 2021. Please revise.

Response 3: Thank you very much for your carefulness and comment! We are sorry for our carelessness. We have deleted "excluding unpublished studies".

Point 4. In network meta-analysis of statistical analysis, the authors didn’t write what model was used to synthesis the data while the MCMC method was just a method used to estimate the unknown parameters. Please revise.

Response 4: Thank you very much for your carefulness and comment! Considering your comment, we have further improved this part. "We will use I2 or p–value to determine the types of model. If I2 > 50% or p ≤ 0.05, it indicates that there is heterogeneity, and we will use the random-effect model. If I2 ≤ 50% or p > 0.05, we will use the fixed-effect model. When there is heterogeneity, we will probe the sources of heterogeneity through sensitivity analysis or subgroup analysis." In line 204-208.

Point 5. In the section on publication bias, the authors didn’t write which method was planned to use for testing the publishing bias. Please revise.

Response 5: Thank you very much for your carefulness and comment! Considering your comment, we have improved the content of evaluation publication bias. "The included data will be tested by Begg´s and Egger´s funnel plot to evaluate whether there are publication bias and the effect of small sample size. If the included studies are concentrated near the midline and symmetrically distributed, it shows that the publication bias has little influence on this research. On the contrary, there will be publication bias." For the revised details, please refer to the line 232-236 in the revised manuscript.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Ismaeel Yunusa

2 Jul 2021

Comparison of efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative therapies for essential hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder

A Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol

PONE-D-21-05843R1

Dear Dr. Zhang,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Ismaeel Yunusa, PharmD, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Ismaeel Yunusa

7 Jul 2021

PONE-D-21-05843R1

Comparison of efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative therapies for essential hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder A Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol

Dear Dr. Zhang:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Ismaeel Yunusa

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Checklist. PRISMA-P checklist.

    (DOC)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES