Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25144295›Full record

Observational studyJournal of hypertension2014

Predicting out-of-office blood pressure level using repeated measurements in the clinic: an observational cohort study.

James P Sheppard, Roger Holder, Linda Nichols, Emma Bray, F D Richard Hobbs, Jonathan Mant, Paul Little, Bryan Williams, Sheila Greenfield, Richard J McManus

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of hypertension, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03858595 (Optimizing Gestational Weight Gain, Birth Weight and Other Perinatal Outcomes Among Pregnant Women at Risk of Hypertension in Pregnancy by Regular Monitoring of Weight Gain and Blood Pressure), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT03858595 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Optimizing Gestational Weight Gain, Birth Weight and Other Perinatal Outcomes Among Pregnant Women at Risk of Hypertension in Pregnancy by Regular Monitoring of Weight Gain and Blood Pressure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorInternational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, BangladeshRan2019 to 2021Enrolled70ConditionsHypertension, Pregnancy-Induced, Hypertension, Essential Hypertension, Hypertension, Pre-EclampsiaArmsSelf monitoring of blood pressure using Health Gauge Device and monthly monitoring of weight gain
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Comparative accuracies of automated and manual office blood pressure measurements in a Chinese population.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2022
    Article
  6. Blood pressure cutoffs for white-coat and masked effects in a large population undergoing home blood pressure monitoring.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2019
    Article
  7. Hypertension: history and development of established and novel treatments.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2018
    Review
  8. Observational
  9. Blood pressure measurement: a call to arms.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Gene silencing in DNA damage repair.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2004
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

James P SheppardaNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford bNational Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford cPrimary Care Clinical Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham dSchool of Psychology, Darwin Building, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire ePrimary Care Unit, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire fSchool of Medicine, University of Southampton, University Road, Southampton gInstitute of Cardiovascular Sciences, University College London (UCL) and National Institute for Health Research UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK.
Roger Holder
Linda Nichols
Emma Bray
F D Richard Hobbs
Jonathan Mant
Paul Little
Bryan Williams
Sheila Greenfield
Richard J McManus
National Institute for Health Research · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Central Lancashire · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Department of Health CDF/01/017Department of Health NIHR-RP-02-12-015Department of Health PB-PG-1207-15042Department of Health RP-PG-1209-10051Department of Health WMCLAHRC-2014-1Medical Research Council MC_PC_13090Medical Research Council MR/K022032/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIdentification of people with lower (white-coat effect) or higher (masked effect) blood pressure at home compared to the clinic usually requires ambulatory or home monitoring. This study assessed whether changes in SBP with repeated measurement at a single clinic predict subsequent differences between clinic and home measurements.

methodsThis study used an observational cohort design and included 220 individuals aged 35-84 years, receiving treatment for hypertension, but whose SBP was not controlled. The characteristics of change in SBP over six clinic readings were defined as the SBP drop, the slope and the quadratic coefficient using polynomial regression modelling. The predictive abilities of these characteristics for lower or higher home SBP readings were investigated with logistic regression and repeated operating characteristic analysis.

resultsThe single clinic SBP drop was predictive of the white-coat effect with a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 50%, positive predictive value of 56% and negative predictive value of 88%. Predictive values for the masked effect and those of the slope and quadratic coefficient were slightly lower, but when the slope and quadratic variables were combined, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for the masked effect were improved to 91, 48, 24 and 97%, respectively.

conclusionCharacteristics obtainable from multiple SBP measurements in a single clinic in patients with treated hypertension appear to reasonably predict those unlikely to have a large white-coat or masked effect, potentially allowing better targeting of out-of-office monitoring in routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

Blood PressureAdultAgedAmbulatory Care FacilitiesBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMasked HypertensionMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityWhite Coat Hypertension

Identifiers

PMID25144295
PMCPMC4222615
OpenAlexW2056016838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.