ArticleJournal of human hypertension2017
Prevalence and reproducibility of differences between home and ambulatory blood pressure and their relation with hypertensive organ damage.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of self-initiated and fully-automated self-measurement on blood pressure.Journal of human hypertension · 2020Trial
- Blood Pressure Measurement: A KDOQI Perspective.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Home and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) better predict cardiovascular disease than office BP, but are not interchangeable. We hypothesised that home BP may be higher than office BP because of anticipatory reactions to self-measurement and studied prevalence and reproducibility of incremental differences between home and daytime ambulatory BP and their relation with hypertensive organ damage. A total of 176 participants (mean age 57.1±12.8 years, 43.2% female) measured their BP for 2 weeks and received a 24-h ambulatory BP in between. Hypertensive organ damage was assessed by urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio and electrocardiographic criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy. Thresholds of 10/5 and 20/10 mm Hg were used to define relevant systolic/diastolic differences between home and ambulatory BP. A higher home compared to ambulatory BP was present in 92 (52.3%) and 35 (19.1%) participants, while lower home BP values were present in 36 (20.4%) and 8 (4.5%) subjects for differences ⩾10/5 and ⩾20/10 mm Hg. Participants with higher home than ambulatory BP differences were older, had higher body mass index, higher office BP, more antihypertensive medication and lower glomerular filtration rate (P<0.01). Differences between home and ambulatory BP were highly reproducible (r=0.80 and 0.67 for systolic and diastolic BP, P<0.001). Both home and ambulatory BPs were associated with organ damage, but their difference was not. Many patients have a significantly higher home than ambulatory BP. Differences between home and ambulatory BP are reproducible, but not associated with hypertensive organ damage. Our findings suggest that ambulatory BP remains the standard of reference when positive differences between home and ambulatory BP exist.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28382957What 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.