ArticleBlood pressure2015
Evaluating measurement error in readings of blood pressure for adolescents and young adults.
Article in Blood pressure, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimation of the average treatment effect with variable selection and measurement error simultaneously addressed for potential confounders.Statistical methods in medical research · 2023Article
- Reflection on modern methods: five myths about measurement error in epidemiological research.International journal of epidemiology · 2020Article
- tetrad: A Set of Stata Commands for Confirmatory Tetrad Analysis.Structural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal · 2016Article
- Vagal Regulation of Cardiac Function in Early Childhood and Cardiovascular Risk in Adolescence.Psychosomatic medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Readings of blood pressure are known to be subject to measurement error, but the optimal method for combining multiple readings is unknown. This study assesses different sources of measurement error in blood pressure readings and assesses methods for combining multiple readings using data from a sample of adolescents/young adults who were part of a longitudinal epidemiological study based in Cebu, Philippines. Three sets of blood pressure readings were collected at 2-year intervals for 2127 adolescents and young adults as part of the Cebu National Longitudinal Health and Nutrition Study. Multi-trait, multi-method (MTMM) structural equation models in different groups were used to decompose measurement error in the blood pressure readings into systematic and random components and to examine patterns in the measurement across males and females and over time. The results reveal differences in the measurement properties of blood pressure readings by sex and over time that suggest the combination of multiple readings should be handled separately for these groups at different time points. The results indicate that an average (mean) of the blood pressure readings has high validity relative to a more complicated factor-score-based linear combination of the readings.
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.