Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15962017›Full record

ReviewClinical medicine & research2005

Self-measurement of blood pressure at home in the management of hypertension.

Hilde Celis, Elly Den Hond, Jan A Staessen

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical medicine & research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Uneven Accuracy of Home Blood Pressure Measurement: A Multicentric Survey.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2015
    Article
  13. [Evaluation of the self-tonometer Icare ONE in comparison to Goldmann applanation tonometry].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2012
    Article
  14. Out-of-office blood pressure: from measurement to control.Integrated blood pressure control · 2012
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hilde CelisStudy Coordinating Center, Hypertension and Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Unit, Department of Molecular and Cardiovascular Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. hilde.celis@med.kuleuven.ac.be
Elly Den Hond
Jan A Staessen
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To be suitable for the management of hypertension, self-measurement of blood pressure (BP) at home should follow international recommendations. The use of accurate and validated measuring devices is an important prerequisite. Upper arm BP monitors are the first choice, while wrist and finger devices cannot be recommended. Measurements should, preferentially, be downloaded from the memory of a device or printed. Reference values have been proposed, but were mostly based on cross-sectional observations and have not yet been widely validated by prospective outcome studies. Currently, levels of home BP of <135 mm Hg systolic and 85 mm Hg diastolic are usually considered normal. Home BP measurement is sometimes recommended as an alternative to ambulatory BP monitoring to diagnose white-coat hypertension.However, home BP measurement cannot replace ambulatory BP monitoring in the diagnosis of hypertension (white-coat), but both techniques have complementary roles. The appropriateness of home BP measurement to guide antihypertensive treatment has only been tested in one large-scale randomized trial: the THOP (Treatment of Hypertension Based on Home or Office Blood Pressure) trial. The THOP trial showed that antihypertensive treatment based on home instead of office BP led to less intensive drug treatment, but also to less BP control with no differences in general wellbeing and left ventricular mass. Home BP monitoring also contributed to the identification of patients with white-coat hypertension. On balance, most evidence supports the view that office BP measurement remains the key in the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. Treatment can be started without confirmation of elevated office BP in patients with high office BP and target organ damage, or a high cardiovascular risk profile. In patients with raised office BP but without target organ damage (white-coat hypertension), or with normal office BP but unexplained target organ damage (masked hypertension), ambulatory or home BP monitoring or both must be used to confirm the diagnosis. Few longitudinal studies have addressed the long-term prognostic meaning of home BP measurement. Until more prospective data become available, management of hypertension exclusively based on self-measurement of BP at home cannot be recommended.

Indexed as

Blood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryBlood Pressure MonitorsClinical Trials as TopicHumansHypertensionModels, StatisticalPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsSelf CareTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID15962017
PMCPMC1142103
OpenAlexW1979271301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.