ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2017
Can auscultatory blood pressure normative values be used for evaluation of oscillometric blood pressure in children?
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hypertension in obese children is associated with vitamin D deficiency and serotonin dysregulation.BMC pediatrics · 2022Article
- The population-based prevalence of hypertension and correlates of blood pressure among Australian children.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2019Article
- Blood pressure is normal, but is the heart?Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2018Observational
- Can auscultatory blood pressure normative values be used for evaluation of oscillometric blood pressure in children?Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to analyze whether auscultatory normative values (Fourth Task Force [4TF]) can be applied to blood pressure (BP) obtained by oscillometric devices. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of oscillometric office BP and ambulatory BP monitoring in 229 children (116 boys), median age 15.31 years. Office systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) values were converted into Z scores using 4TF and oscillometric (German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescent [KiGGS]) reference values. There was good correlation between the two normative methods (r=0.9773 for SBP, r=0.9627 for DBP). Results from Bland-Altman test revealed only minimal differences in Z scores between 4TF and KiGGS for SBP, but a significant proportional error for DBP. 4TF and KiGGS Z scores were equally predictive of ambulatory hypertension. In conclusion, auscultatory and oscillometric normative data are interchangeable for SBP but not for DBP.
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.