Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30214220›Full record

ArticleVascular health and risk management2018

Clinical accuracy of the Omron M3 Comfort

Jirar Topouchian, Zoya Hakobyan, Jennifer Asmar, Svetlana Gurgenian, Parounak Zelveian, Roland Asmar

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

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

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Lack of validated blood pressure devices for use in pregnancy available from Australian pharmacies.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Hypertension in Women Across the Lifespan.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

6 authors.

Jirar TopouchianDiagnosis and Therapeutic Center, Hôtel Dieu Hospital, Paris, France.
Zoya HakobyanDepartment of Preventive Cardiology, Institute of Cardiology, Yerevan, Armenia.
Jennifer AsmarDepartment of Gynecology-Obstetric, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France.
Svetlana GurgenianDepartment of Arterial Hypertension, Institute of Cardiology, Yerevan, Armenia.
Parounak ZelveianDepartment of Preventive Cardiology, Institute of Cardiology, Yerevan, Armenia.
Roland AsmarFoundation-Medical Research Institutes (F-MRI), Geneva, Switzerland, ra@cmcv.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic devices for blood pressure (BP) measurements need to go through independent clinical validation as recommended by different authorities, both in general and in special populations such as pregnancy.

objectiveTo evaluate the accuracy of the Omron Evolv

methodsBoth devices, the Evolv and the M3 Comfort, measure BP at the brachial level using the oscillometric method. The study was performed according to the recently published protocol, the so-called "modified Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI)/British Hypertension Society (BHS)/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) protocol" or the "Universal Standard Protocol." Validation of each device included 45 pregnant women in the second and third gestational trimester of whom 15 had pre-eclampsia, 15 had gestational hypertension and 15 were normotensives. BP differences between the observer and the device BP values were classified into three categories (≤5, ≤10, and ≤15 mmHg) and the mean BP differences (test vs reference) and its SD were calculated.

resultsBoth devices, the Evolv and the M3 Comfort, achieved a grade A/A in both pregnancy and pre-eclampsia. The mean difference (SD) between the mercury standard and the device BP values in pregnancy were: 1) for the Evolv of -0.7±2.3 mmHg for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and -0.1±1.8 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure (DBP); 2) for the M3 Comfort of -1.6±2.8 mmHg for SBP and -0.1±2.3 mmHg for DBP.

conclusionBoth devices, the Evolv and the M3 Comfort, achieved a grade A/A for both SBP and DBP and fulfill the validation protocol criteria in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia. Consequently, these two devices can be recommended for home BP measurements in this specific population.

Indexed as

Blood PressureAdultBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryCalibrationCase-Control StudiesEquipment DesignFemaleHumansHypertension, Pregnancy-InducedObserver VariationPredictive Value of TestsPre-EclampsiaPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, SecondPregnancy Trimester, ThirdProspective Studiesblood pressureblood pressure measurementshome blood pressurepre-eclampsiapregnancyself-BP measurementvalidation

Identifiers

PMID30214220
PMCPMC6124447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.