ArticleJournal of human hypertension2018
The impact of unrecorded readings on the precision and diagnostic performance of home blood pressure monitoring: a statistical study.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Self-Measured Blood Pressure Telemonitoring Programs: A Pragmatic How-to Guide.American journal of hypertension · 2023Article
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
Hypertension is a major cardiovascular risk factor. To address the disease adequately, most clinicians rely on home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM). However, the impact of unrecorded BP values on the precision and diagnostic performance of BP schedules is unknown. We obtained 103 HBP patients schedules from a previous study. Then, readings were randomly removed from each schedule in order to create new incomplete schedules using a resampling technique. We obtained 10,000 new incomplete schedules. For each number of randomly removed readings, the percentages of incomplete schedules outside a systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) range of 5/3 mmHg were calculated from the same complete patient's schedule. The sensitivity and specificity of incomplete HBPM schedules regarding BP control were also assessed. One hundred three HBPM schedules were analyzed. Mean patients' age was 67.9 ± 9.9 years. In non-diabetic patients, the mean BP of complete schedules' means was 131.9 ± 12.4/75.5 ± 10.5. In diabetic patients, the mean BP of complete schedules' means was 135.5 ± 14.0/73.4 ± 8.2 mmHg. When schedules were composed of 14 and 21 random measures, differences over 5 mmHg were seen in 2.6% and 0.1% of non-diabetic patients' schedule and 3.7% and 0.1% of diabetic patients' schedule, respectively. At 21 measurements, sensitivity and specificity were approximately 95% and 98% in non-diabetic patients and 90% and 99% in non-diabetic patients, respectively. HBPM precision and diagnostic performance improve rapidly with accumulation of readings. Incomplete schedules composed of 21 readings can provide an almost perfect diagnostic tool compared with the complete schedule reference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29467411What 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.