ArticleGlobal health action2012
Community-based blood pressure measurement by non-health workers using electronic devices: a validation study.
Article in Global health action, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of blood pressure measurements obtained in the home setting: analysis of the Health Measures at Home Study.Blood pressure monitoring · 2016Trial
- Impact of a Workplace Health Promotion Program on Employees' Blood Pressure in a Public University.PloS one · 2016Trial
- Listen to Your Heart and Mind: A Pilot Mixed-Methods Study on Combined Screening for Raised Blood Pressure, Atrial Fibrillation, Cognitive Impairment and Hearing Loss in Older Adults.Australasian journal on ageing · 2026Article
- Community Health Workers Equipped with an mHealth Application Can Accurately Diagnose Hypertension in Rural Guatemala.Global heart · 2025Article
- Poor glycaemic control and its metabolic and demographic risk factors in a Malaysian community-based study.International journal of public health · 2018Article
- HDSS Profile: The South East Asia Community Observatory Health and Demographic Surveillance System (SEACO HDSS).International journal of epidemiology · 2017Article
- Comparison of Health Examination Survey Methods in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, England, Scotland, and the United States.American journal of epidemiology · 2017Article
- Comparison of smartphone application-based vital sign monitors without external hardware versus those used in clinical practice: a prospective trial.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2017Observational
- A Community Health Worker-Based Program for Elderly People With Hypertension in Indonesia: A Qualitative Study, 2013.Preventing chronic disease · 2015Article
- What do community health workers have to say about their work, and how can this inform improved programme design? A case study with CHWs within Kenya.Global health action · 2015Article
- Literacy and motivation for the prevention and control of hypertension among female community health volunteers: a qualitative study from Nepal.Global health action · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPopulation monitoring and screening of blood pressure is an important part of any population health strategy. Qualified health workers are expensive and often unavailable for screening. Non-health workers with electronic blood pressure monitors are increasingly used in community-based research. This approach is unvalidated. In a poor, urban community we compared blood pressure measurements taken by non-health workers using electronic devices against qualified health workers using mercury sphygmomanometers.
methodFifty-six adult volunteers participated in the research. Data were collected by five qualified health workers, and six non-health workers. Participants were randomly allocated to have their blood pressure measured on four consecutive occasions by alternating a qualified health worker with a non-health worker. Descriptive statistics and graphs, and mixed effects linear models to account for the repeated measurement were used in the analysis.
resultsBlood pressure readings by non-health workers were more reliable than those taken by qualified health workers. There was no significant difference between the readings taken by qualified health workers and those taken by non-health workers for systolic blood pressure. Non-health workers were, on average, 5-7 mmHg lower in their measures of blood pressure than the qualified health workers (95%HPD: -2.9 to -10.0) for diastolic blood pressure.
conclusionThe results provide empirical evidence that supports the practice of non-health workers using electronic devices for BP measurement in community-based research and screening. Non-health workers recorded blood pressures that differed from qualified health workers by no more than 10 mmHg. The approach is promising, but more research is needed to establish the generalisability of the results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.