ABSTRACT
The purpose of this communication is to respond to the continuing invalid criticism by Lemmer and Middeke of the MAPEC and Hygia Chronotherapy Trial by emphasizing the: (i) already unambiguously reported ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM)-based definition of hypertension utilized as the inclusion criterion of both investigations and (ii) impact of bedtime hypertension chronotherapy on ABPM-assessed parameters and cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcome for participants further categorized by influential markers of CVD risk. In so doing, we call attention to apparent unethical misconduct of Lemmer and Middeke of multiple duplicated publications of the very same unfounded criticisms.
Disclosure statement
The authors report no conflicts of interest.