ArticleJournal of hypertension2019
Simplified blood pressure tables based on different height percentiles for screening elevated blood pressure in children.
Article in Journal of hypertension, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Fetal Growth Restriction to Adolescent Cardiometabolic Risk: The Impact of Catch-Up Growth and Adiposity.Nutrients · 2026Article
- A proposal to simplify the definition of pediatric hypertension: bridging the gap between perception and action.BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Pediatric Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Health in Adulthood.Current hypertension reports · 2024Review
- Height-based equations as screening tools for elevated blood pressure in the SAYCARE study.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2020Article
- ANTHROPOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS, DIETARY HABITS, SERUM LIPID AND GLUCOSE LEVELS IN RELATION TO HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE AMONG ADOLESCENT BOYS AND GIRLS IN CROATIA.Acta clinica Croatica · 2020Article
- A new simple formula built on the American Academy of Pediatrics criteria for the screening of hypertension in overweight/obese children.European journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
- Implications of the 2017 AAP Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Hypertension in Children and Adolescents: a Review.Current hypertension reports · 2019Review
- The impact of new guidelines on the prevalence of hypertension in children: A cross-sectional evaluation.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Article
- A simple table based on height to assess elevated and high blood pressure in children.Journal of human hypertension · 2019Article
- Performance of the Simplified American Academy of Pediatrics Table to Screen Elevated Blood Pressure in Children.JAMA pediatrics · 2018Article
- Omitted Mention of and Reference to Related Study.JAMA pediatrics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on byReply.2018
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn 2017, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) updated its clinical practice guideline for screening and management of high blood pressure (BP) in children. In addition, the AAP guideline also recommended a simplified BP table for screening purposes in children aged 1-12 years, which was based on the fifth height percentile. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the simplified AAP table and six other simplified tables across different height percentiles in predicting elevated BP in US children.
methodsWe included 6816 children aged 8-12 years in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) in 1999-2016 and 3145 children aged 5-12 years in the NHANES III in 1988-1994. Apart from the AAP simplified table at fifth height percentile, we generated sex and age-specific BP tables to predict elevated BP at the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th and 95th percentiles of height, respectively, based on the reference AAP guideline.
resultsIn NHANES 1999-2016, with the height percentile increasing (5th-95th), positive predictive value (PPV) substantially increased (46.9 to 94.0%), while negative predictive value (NPV) slightly decreased (100 to 96.7%); specificity increased (84.4 to 99.3%) while sensitivity decreased (99.9 to 75.7%). The results were similar in NHANES III.
conclusionThe simplified AAP table could be necessary in clinical practice to avoid omitting any true positive case, but a simplified and more efficient table at a higher height percentile could be more suitable in settings such as school screening programs by nonpaediatricians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30067249What 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.