Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27977471›Full record

SynthesisJournal of hypertension2017

Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients' resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review.

Noa Kallioinen, Andrew Hill, Mark S Horswill, Helen E Ward, Marcus O Watson

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of hypertension, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07397260 (Effects of Manually Recorded or Automatically Transmitted Home Blood Pressures With or Without Automated Patient Feedback on Hypertension Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 173 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
173citing papers in PubMed, 10 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.

NCT07397260 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Manually Recorded or Automatically Transmitted Home Blood Pressures With or Without Automated Patient Feedback on Hypertension Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorNorthwestern UniversityRan2026 to 2028Enrolled1,304ConditionsHypertension (HTN)ArmsSelf report of home measured blood pressure via patient EHR portal, Automated feedback about home blood pressure results, Automated Transmission of Remotely Measured Blood Pressure
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

173 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Guideline
  5. Hypertension Canada guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in adults in primary care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Guideline
  10. Guideline
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

113 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Noa KallioinenaSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia bClinical Skills Development Service, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Herston cThe Prince Charles Hospital, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Chermside dSchool of Medicine, The University of Queensland Mayne Medical School, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Andrew Hill
Mark S Horswill
Helen E Ward
Marcus O Watson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo interpret blood pressure (BP) data appropriately, healthcare providers need to be knowledgeable of the factors that can potentially impact the accuracy of BP measurement and contribute to variability between measurements.

methodsA systematic review of studies quantifying BP measurement inaccuracy. Medline and CINAHL databases were searched for empirical articles and systematic reviews published up to June 2015. Empirical articles were included if they reported a study that was relevant to the measurement of adult patients' resting BP at the upper arm in a clinical setting (e.g. ward or office); identified a specific source of inaccuracy; and quantified its effect. Reference lists and reviews were searched for additional articles.

resultsA total of 328 empirical studies were included. They investigated 29 potential sources of inaccuracy, categorized as relating to the patient, device, procedure or observer. Significant directional effects were found for 27; however, for some, the effects were inconsistent in direction. Compared with true resting BP, significant effects of individual sources ranged from -23.6 to +33 mmHg SBP and -14 to +23 mmHg DBP.

conclusionA single BP value outside the expected range should be interpreted with caution and not taken as a definitive indicator of clinical deterioration. Where a measurement is abnormally high or low, further measurements should be taken and averaged. Wherever possible, BP values should be recorded graphically within ranges. This may reduce the impact of sources of inaccuracy and reduce the scope for misinterpretations based on small, likely erroneous or misleading, changes.

Indexed as

Blood PressureAlcohol DrinkingArmBlood Pressure DeterminationCaffeineCold TemperatureEatingHumansHypertensionNicotineReproducibility of ResultsRestTobacco UseUrinary BladderWhite Coat HypertensionCaffeineNicotine

Identifiers

PMID27977471
PMCPMC5278896

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.