Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23955605›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of hypertension2014

How many measurements are needed to estimate blood pressure variability without loss of prognostic information?

Luis J Mena, Gladys E Maestre, Tine W Hansen, Lutgarde Thijs, Yanping Liu, José Boggia, Yan Li, Masahiro Kikuya, Kristina Björklund-Bodegård, Takayoshi Ohkubo and 18 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of hypertension, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Blood Pressure Variability (BPV): What Clinicians Need to Know a 2025 Expert Consensus Report Endorsed by the Egyptian Society of Cardiology.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Assessment of blood pressure variability: characteristics and comparison of blood pressure measurement methods.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

28 authors.

Luis J MenaDepartamento de Informática, Universidad Politécnica de Sinaloa, Mazatlán, México.
Gladys E Maestre
Tine W Hansen
Lutgarde Thijs
Yanping Liu
José Boggia
Yan Li
Masahiro Kikuya
Kristina Björklund-Bodegård
Takayoshi Ohkubo
Jørgen Jeppesen
Christian Torp-Pedersen
Eamon Dolan
Tatiana Kuznetsova
Katarzyna Stolarz-Skrzypek
Valérie Tikhonoff
Sofia Malyutina
Edoardo Casiglia
Yuri Nikitin
Lars Lind
Edgardo Sandoya
Kalina Kawecka-Jaszcz
Jan Filipovsky
Yutaka Lmai
Jiguang Wang
Eoin O'Brien
Jan A Staessen
International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes (IDACO) Investigators

Funding

Gene-Environment Interactions in Cognition in Venezuelan FamiliesR01AG036469 · NIA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CHACON, INARA, MAESTRE, GLADYS E. · 2011 to 2015
$2.7M
European Research Council 294713NIA NIH HHS 1R01AG036469-01A1NIA NIH HHS R01 AG036469
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAverage real variability (ARV) is a recently proposed index for short-term blood pressure (BP) variability. We aimed to determine the minimum number of BP readings required to compute ARV without loss of prognostic information.

methodsARV was calculated from a discovery dataset that included 24-hour ambulatory BP measurements for 1,254 residents (mean age = 56.6 years; 43.5% women) of Copenhagen, Denmark. Concordance between ARV from full (≥80 BP readings) and randomly reduced 24-hour BP recordings was examined, as was prognostic accuracy. A test dataset that included 5,353 subjects (mean age = 54.0 years; 45.6% women) with at least 48 BP measurements from 11 randomly recruited population cohorts was used to validate the results.

resultsIn the discovery dataset, a minimum of 48 BP readings allowed an accurate assessment of the association between cardiovascular risk and ARV. In the test dataset, over 10.2 years (median), 806 participants died (335 cardiovascular deaths, 206 cardiac deaths) and 696 experienced a major fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event. Standardized multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were computed for associations between outcome and BP variability. Higher diastolic ARV in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings predicted (P < 0.01) total (HR = 1.12), cardiovascular (HR = 1.19), and cardiac (HR = 1.19) mortality and fatal combined with nonfatal cerebrovascular events (HR = 1.16). Higher systolic ARV in 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings predicted (P < 0.01) total (HR = 1.12), cardiovascular (HR = 1.17), and cardiac (HR = 1.24) mortality.

conclusionsForty-eight BP readings over 24 hours were observed to be adequate to compute ARV without meaningful loss of prognostic information.

Indexed as

Blood PressureBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryAgedAntihypertensive AgentsCause of DeathChi-Square DistributionDenmarkFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsAntihypertensive Agentsambulatory blood pressureblood pressureblood pressure variabilityepidemiologyhypertensionpopulation sciencerisk factors.

Identifiers

PMID23955605
PMCPMC3848629

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.