ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2013
A comparison of two ambulatory blood pressure monitors worn at the same time.
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of 3 Devices for 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in a Nonclinical Environment Through a Randomized Trial.American journal of hypertension · 2020Trial
- Evaluation of the Omron HEM-907 automated blood pressure device: comparison with office and ambulatory blood pressure readings.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2019Trial
- Assessing the accuracy of the OMRON HEM-907XL oscillometric blood pressure measurement device in patients with nondialytic chronic kidney disease.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2017Trial
- A comparison study of brachial blood pressure recorded with Spacelabs 90217A and Mobil-O-Graph NG devices under static and ambulatory conditions.Journal of human hypertension · 2016Trial
- A Dual-Output Physiology-Informed Neural Network Architecture for Continuous Cuffless Blood Pressure Waveform Estimation: A Proof‑of‑Concept.Artery research · 2026Article
- A study of the VaSera arterial stiffness device in US patients.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2017Article
- Integrating Out-of-Office Blood Pressure in the Diagnosis and Management of Hypertension.Current cardiology reports · 2016Review
- What is the truth? Differences in ambulatory blood pressure data between monitors.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are limited data in the literature comparing two simultaneously worn ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) devices. The authors compared BPs from two monitors (Mobil-O-Graph [I.E.M., Stolberg, Germany] and Spacelabs 90207 [Spacelabs Medical, Issequah, WA]). In the nonrandomized component of the study, simultaneous 8-hour BP and heart rate data were measured by Mobil-O-Graph, consistently applied to the nondominant arm, and Spacelabs to the dominant arm on 12 untreated adults. Simultaneous 8-hour BP and heart data were obtained by the same monitors randomly assigned to a dominant or nondominant arm on 12 other untreated adults. Oscillometric BP profiles were obtained in the dominant and nondominant arms of the above 24 patients using an Accutorr (Datascope, Mahwah, NJ) device. The Spacelabs monitor recorded a 10.2-mm Hg higher systolic pressure in the nonrandomized (P=.0016) and a 7.9-mm Hg higher systolic pressure in the randomized studies (P=.00008) compared with the Mobil-O-Graph. The mean arterial pressures were 1 mm Hg to 2 mm Hg different between monitors in the two studies, and heart rates were nearly identical. Our observations, if confirmed in larger cohorts, support the concern that ABPM device manufacturers consider developing normative databases for their devices.
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.