Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27134902›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2016

Which is More Accurate in Measuring the Blood Pressure? A Digital or an Aneroid Sphygmomanometer.

Bhaskar Shahbabu, Aparajita Dasgupta, Kaushik Sarkar, Sanjaya Kumar Sahoo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Physics-Informed Emulation of Systemic Circulation for Fast Parameter Estimation and Uncertainty Quantification.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. RSSDI Guidelines for the management of hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus.International journal of diabetes in developing countries · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. The mercury sphygmomanometer: soon a museum piece!Journal of human hypertension · 2021
    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

4 authors.

Bhaskar ShahbabuJunior Resident, Department of PSM, AIIH&PH , Kolkata, West Bengal, India .
Aparajita DasguptaProfessor and HOD, Department of PSM, AIIH&PH , Kolkata, West Bengal, India .
Kaushik SarkarJunior Resident, Department of PSM, AIIH&PH , Kolkata, West Bengal, India .
Sanjaya Kumar SahooJunior Resident, Department of PSM, AIIH&PH , Kolkata, West Bengal, India .

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHypertension is one of the major public health problem affecting the whole world so its accurate measurement is of utmost importance for its early diagnosis and management. Concerns related to the potential ill effects of mercury on health and environment, has led to the widespread use of non-mercury sphygmomanometers.

aimA study was conducted to compare the accuracy of readings of aneroid and digital sphygmomanometers in reference to mercury sphygmomanometers and determine the hypertensive classification agreement between the mercury and non-mercury devices. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study was conducted in an OPD of a health centre in a rural community of West Bengal which is the rural field practice area of our institute. An aneroid and a digital sphygmomanometer were compared to a properly calibrated mercury sphygmomanometer. All the subjects above the age of 25 years, in two days per week, selected randomly from five working days per week in a period of one month were selected. Two blood pressure readings of each of 218 study subjects was recorded with each pretested sphygmomanometer. Paired t-test, Kappa coefficients, sensitivity and specificity tests were done. Receiver Operating Characteristics curve analysis was done and Youden index was estimated to detect the optimal cut off point for the diagnosis of hypertension by non-mercury sphygmomanometers.

resultsData analysis of 218 study subjects showed the mean difference of the mercury reading and the test device was much less for aneroid than that of the digital device for both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. More than 89% of aneroid readings and less than 44% of the readings by digital device had absolute difference of 5mm Hg. when compared with the mercury readings for both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Sensitivity and specificity of aneroid device was higher (86.7% and 98.7%) than digital device (80% and 67.7%). Receiver Operating Characteristic curve had larger area under the curve for aneroid device than digital device for both SBP and DBP.

conclusionThe aneroid device had better accuracy than the digital device as compared to mercury sphygmomanometer and should be used for proper and better management.

Indexed as

Blood pressure measurementDigital sphygmomanometerHypertensionReceiver operating characteristics curveyouden index

Identifiers

PMID27134902
PMCPMC4843288

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.