ArticleCurrent hypertension reports2015
MEthods of ASsessing blood pressUre: identifying thReshold and target valuEs (MeasureBP): a review & study protocol.
Article in Current hypertension reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite progress in automated blood pressure measurement (BPM) technology, there is limited research linking hard outcomes to automated office BPM (OBPM) treatment targets and thresholds. Equivalences for automated BPM devices have been estimated from approximations of standardized manual measurements of 140/90 mmHg. Until outcome-driven targets and thresholds become available for automated measurement methods, deriving evidence-based equivalences between automated methods and standardized manual OBPM is the next best solution. The MeasureBP study group was initiated by the Canadian Hypertension Education Program to close this critical knowledge gap. MeasureBP aims to define evidence-based equivalent values between standardized manual OBPM and automated BPM methods by synthesizing available evidence using a systematic review and individual subject-level data meta-analyses. This manuscript provides a review of the literature and MeasureBP study protocol. These results will lay the evidenced-based foundation to resolve uncertainties within blood pressure guidelines which, in turn, will improve the management of hypertension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25790798What 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.