Trial reportBlood pressure monitoring2019
Blood pressure measurements in research: suitability of auscultatory, beat-to-beat, and ambulatory blood pressure measurements.
Trial report in Blood pressure monitoring, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effects of aerobic and resistance exercise on blood pressure in uncomplicated and at risk pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Women's health (London, England)Pooled it
- Advancements and challenges in blood pressure monitoring using pulse wave propagation: a comprehensive review and ISO 81060-2 based statistical analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Review
- Acute cardiovascular responses to slow and deep breathing in normotensive men and women.Experimental physiology · 2026Article
- Effects of Aerobic Exercise Versus High-Intensity Interval Training on V̇O2max and Blood Pressure.Cureus · 2022Review
- A Novel Methodology for the Synchronous Collection and Multimodal Visualization of Continuous Neurocardiovascular and Neuromuscular Physiological Data in Adults with Long COVID.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Design and methodology of the Aging Nephropathy Study (AGNES): a prospective cohort study of elderly patients with chronic kidney disease.BMC nephrology · 2020Article
- Comparison of two non-invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring techniques in brown bears (Veterinary and animal science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to validate the accuracy of beat-to-beat measurements with those taken with an aneroid sphygmomanometer by auscultatory method. A secondary aim was to explore differences between auscultatory and beat-to-beat blood pressure (BP) with daytime ambulatory BP measurements. PARTICIPANTS AND
methodsA total of 46 participants, comprising 21 males, aged 47±13 years, height 171±8.5 cm and weight 82±16.8 kg attended the Exercise Physiology Laboratory at the University of New England (Armidale, New South Wales, Australia). During the visit, participants had their BP - systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) - measured using auscultatory methods and a Finometer. An ambulatory BP monitor was fitted during the same visit and worn for a minimum of 12 h.
resultsAuscultatory measurements were slightly higher than beat-to-beat for both SBP and DBP. There was no difference between auscultatory and beat-to-beat SBP with a mean difference of 0.23 mmHg (P=0.87). There were disparities between auscultatory and beat-to-beat DBP, with a mean difference of 4.82 mmHg (P<0.01). Daytime ambulatory BP was higher than both auscultatory and beat-to-beat measurements for both SBP and DBP, with P less than 0.001 for all measures.
conclusionThere was a high level of reliability in the beat-to-beat SBP with that seen by auscultatory; however, there were disparities in DBP measurements using the same devices, which raise concerns over the accuracy of beat-to-beat DBP. Ambulatory systolic and diastolic measures were higher than beat-to-beat and auscultatory; however, they may be more suitable for monitoring diurnal changes in BP, depending upon the research model.
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.