ReviewClinical and experimental nephrology2016
Clinical value of ambulatory blood pressure: Is it time to recommend for all patients with hypertension?
Review in Clinical and experimental nephrology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blood pressure load associated with progressive kidney function decline in biopsy-proven atherosclerotic chronic kidney disease patients.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2025Article
- Patient-specific multifactorial mortality risk assessment using classification and regression tree analysis in the context of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.Journal of nephrology · 2025Article
- The assessment of hypertension in kidney transplant patients: time to change our approach?Clinical kidney journal · 2022Article
- Effect of Social, regional, and education status and season on blood pressure.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Article
- Ambulatory blood pressure and arterial stiffness in individuals with type 1 diabetes.Diabetologia · 2018Article
- White-coat hypertension and albuminuria; lessons from the Hisayama and Ohasama studies.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2018Article
- Short-term blood pressure variability and long-term blood pressure variability: which one is a reliable predictor for recurrent stroke.Journal of human hypertension · 2017Article
- Novel Approaches to Investigate One-Carbon Metabolism and Related B-Vitamins in Blood Pressure.Nutrients · 2016Review
- The deadly line linking sympathetic overdrive, dipping status and vascular risk: critical appraisal and therapeutic implications.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypertension is a very common disease, and office measurements of blood pressure are frequently inaccurate. Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) offers a more accurate diagnosis, more detailed readings of average blood pressures, better blood pressure measurement during sleep, fewer false positives by detecting more white-coat hypertension, and fewer false negatives by detecting more masked hypertension. ABPM offers better management of clinical outcomes. For example, based on more accurate measurements of blood pressure variability, ABPM demonstrates that taking antihypertensive medication at night leads to better controlled nocturnal blood pressure, which translates into less end organ damage and fewer clinical complications of hypertension. For these reasons, albeit some shortcomings which were discussed, ABPM should be considered as a first-line tool for diagnosing and managing hypertension.
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.